SCOTUS UPHOLDS TRUMP'S TRAVEL BAN ON SEVERAL MUSLIM COUNTRIES (GORUSH):
IRAN
LIBYA
SYRIA
YEMEN
SOMALIA
CHAD
NORTH KOREA
VENEZUELA
NEIL GORUSH BALANCES SCOTUS & RULES AS SCALIA MAY HAVE.
DEMOCRATS STOP WAITING FOR TRUMP'S IMPEACHMENT OR TRYING TO ENCOURAGE AN ASSASSINATION.
INSTEAD KEY DEMS SHOULD BE STRATEGIZING TO WIN IN 2018 OR 2020.
Sources: BBC, CTV News, NY Times, TIME, Youtube
***** Supreme Court allows Trump travel ban to take full effect
The US Supreme Court has ruled President Donald Trump's travel ban on six mainly Muslim countries can go fully into effect.
But the directive against travellers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen still faces legal challenges.
On Monday, seven of the nine justices lifted injunctions imposed by lower courts on the policy.
The ruling covers the third version of the directive that President Trump has issued since taking office.
The presidential proclamation also imposed restrictions on travellers from North Korea and some Venezuelan government officials, which have gone into effect.
In striking down the other parts, lower court judges had cited Mr Trump's campaign description of his policy as a "Muslim ban".
Further arguments will be heard this week by federal courts in San Francisco, California, and Richmond, Virginia.
In June, the Supreme Court allowed an earlier version of the policy to take partial effect.
The president's travel bans have each been frustrated by the courts to some degree:
In January, he signed an order banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries and suspending all refugee entry. The measure prompted protests and legal challenges across dozens of states
A revised version in March exempted green card holders and dual citizens. By June, the Supreme Court allowed most of it to go into effect, a including 120-day ban on all refugees entering the US, but granted a wide exemption for those with a "bona fide connection" to the US
President Trump's third order was announced in late September. It added non-Muslim-majority nations North Korea and Venezuela, provisions which lower courts have allowed to proceed
What have lower courts said?
In striking down the other parts, federal judges have cited Mr Trump's campaign description of his policy as a "Muslim ban".
Lower courts have also found the policy violated the first amendment of the US constitution covering freedom of religion.
In October, a Maryland federal judge said: "The 'initial' announcement of the Muslim ban, offered repeatedly and explicitly through President Trump's own statements, forcefully and persuasively expressed his purpose in unequivocal terms."
A federal judge in Hawaii said the administration "lacks sufficient findings that the entry of more than 150 million nationals from six specified countries would be 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'".
A court in Virginia ruled: "The illogic of the government's contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed," the court ruling said, pointing out that the countries' populations were between 90% and 99% Muslim.
TRUMP'S NATIONAL SECURITY TRAVEL BAN UPHELD BY SCOTUS (VICTORY):
BANS TRAVEL FROM SIX MUSLIM COUNTRIES LINKED TO TERRORISM.
IRAN, LIBYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN, SYRIA, YEMEN,
SCOTUS AGREES TO HEAR FULL ARGUMENTS ON TRAVEL BAN IN OCTOBER.
Sources: BBC News, CBS News, Fox News, Youtube
****** Supreme Court Upholds Trump Administration’s Travel Ban
The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump to forge ahead with a limited version of his ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries to the U.S. Trump hailed the decision as a “victory for national security,” but it’s likely to set off a new round of court disputes over anti-terror efforts and religious discrimination.
The justices will hear full arguments in October in the case that has stirred heated emotions across the nation and pointed rebukes from lower courts saying the administration is targeting Muslims. Until then, the court said Monday, Trump’s ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced if those visitors lack a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”
The ruling sets up a potential clash between the government and opponents of the ban over the strength of visitors’ ties to the United States. A senior official said plans already had been written to enforce the ban aggressively. But immigrant groups said relatively few people try to enter the United States without well-established ties. Those groups said they will be sending lawyers and monitors back to American airports, where the initial, immediate implementation of the ban in January caused chaos and confusion.
State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the ban would be implemented starting 72 hours after being cleared by courts. That means it will take effect Thursday morning.
The president has denied that the ban targets Muslims but says it is needed “to protect the nation from terrorist activities” committed by citizens of the six countries. All six have been designated as presenting heightened concerns about terrorism and travel to the United States.
The 90-day ban is necessary to allow an internal review of screening procedures for visa applicants from the countries, the administration says. That review should be complete before Oct. 2, the first day the justices could hear arguments in their new term.
The ban will have run its course by then, raising a question of whether the justices will even issue a decision in the case or dismiss it because it has been overtaken by events.
The court asked both sides to address the issue of timing, along with questions about whether the ban is aimed at Muslims, the impact of Trump’s provocative campaign statements and federal courts’ authority to restrain the president in the area of immigration.
A 120-day ban on refugees also is being allowed to take effect on a similar, limited basis.
Three of the court’s conservative justices said they would have let the administration apply the bans without the limits imposed by their colleagues.
Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, said the government has shown it is likely to win the legal case in the end. Thomas said the government’s interest in preserving national security outweighs any hardship to people denied entry into the country.
Trump hailed the court’s order as a “clear victory for our national security,” especially after lower court rulings that blocked the travel ban in its entirety. He said in a statement that his “number one responsibility” is to keep Americans safe.
His administration’s implementation plans, largely orchestrated by White House adviser Stephen Miller, focus on refusing entry to people who are unable to show a substantial and pre-existing tie to a person or institution in the United States. The plans were described by a senior official who was familiar with them, speaking on condition of anonymity because this person was not authorized to discuss them publicly by name.
But some immigration lawyers said relatively few people would fall under the ban because people coming to study, work or visit family members already have sufficient relationships with others already is in the country.
“This order, properly construed, should really allow for only the narrowest implementation of any part of the ban. It’s going to be really important for us to make sure the government abides by the terms of the order and does not try to use it as a backdoor into implementing the full- scale Muslim ban,” said Omar Jadwat, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who is representing some of the challengers to the travel ban.
The court’s opinion explained the kinds of relationships people from the six countries must demonstrate to obtain a U.S. visa.
“For individuals, a close familial relationship is required,” the court said. For people who want to come to the United States to work or study, “the relationship must be formal, documented and formed in the ordinary course, not for the purpose of evading” the travel ban.
The opinion faulted the two federal appeals courts that had blocked the travel policy for going too far to limit Trump’s authority over immigration. The president announced the travel ban a week after he took office in January and revised it in March after setbacks in court.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the ban was “rooted in religious animus” toward Muslims and pointed to Trump’s campaign promise to impose a ban on Muslims entering the country as well as tweets and remarks he has made since becoming president.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the ban does not comply with federal immigration law, including a prohibition on nationality-based discrimination. That court also put a hold on separate aspects of the policy that would keep all refugees out of the United States for 120 days and cut by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000, the cap on refugees in the current government spending year that ends Sept. 30.
Trump’s first executive order on travel applied to travelers from Iraq and well as the six countries, and took effect immediately, causing chaos and panic at airports as the Homeland Security Department scrambled to figure out whom the order covered and how it was to be implemented.
A federal judge blocked it eight days later, and that was upheld by a 9th circuit panel. Rather than pursue an appeal, the administration said it would revise the policy.
TRUMP KNOWS ISIL HAS SET TRAPS FOR US MILITARY GROUND TROOPS IN SYRIA.
TRUMP IS NOT A HOTHEAD WARHAWK SEEKING TO MAKE $$$ FROM WAR CONTRACTS.
Sources: NY Post, YouTube
***** Trump: ‘We’re not going into Syria’
Amid complaints that his aides are saying different things about Syria and his policy is confusing, President Trump emphatically cleared the air.
“We’re not going into Syria,” he told me yesterday in an exclusive interview. “Our policy is the same — it hasn’t changed. We’re not going into Syria.”
The president, speaking by phone Tuesday, called Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a “butcher” and a “barbarian” for using sarin gas on his own people, but said last week’s successful missile strike was not the start of a campaign to oust the dictator.
“Our big mission is getting rid of ISIS,” Trump said. “That’s where it’s always been. But when you see kids choking to death, you watch their lungs burning out, we had to hit him and hit him hard."
called the attack, which involved 59 cruise missiles fired from two Navy destroyers, “an act of humanity.”
I asked if he, as a new president, found it difficult to make the final decision, knowing the stakes.
“It’s very tough to give that final go-ahead when you know you’re talking about human life,” he said. “We went back and forth, and also back and forth about severity. We could have gone bigger in terms of targets and more of them, but we thought this would be the appropriate first shot.”
Later, he added, “We hope he won’t do any more gassing.”
The interview was scheduled to last 15 minutes, but ran nearly twice as long. Throughout, the president was gracious, energized and focused. He answered every question, and invited me to ask more as aides tried to get him to his next appointment. So I did.
How seriously does he take the threats from Russia, and does he think there is still a possibility for cooperation in the region with Vladimir Putin?
“We’re not exactly on the same wavelength with Russia, to put it mildly,” Trump answered. “Putin must see what a barbarian this guy is, and it’s a very bad symbol for Russia with this guy gassing children and using barrel bombs.”
With Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in Moscow as we spoke, Trump said he hoped for Putin’s cooperation, but added, “I don’t know.”
He was especially upset that Syria had used chemical weapons after supposedly destroying all its stockpiles under a deal President Obama signed in 2013 and repeatedly boasted about. I asked whether that fact gave him more pause about Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.
“I don’t need more pause about Iran,” Trump said. “It was the single worst deal ever. It’s a disgrace that a deal like that was even signed. It made Iran a power from a country that was ready to fall apart.”
He wasn’t finished. “Iran won’t honor its deal. Instead of saying, ‘Thank you very much for saving our country,’ they’ve been emboldened.”
Noting those problems and North Korea’s threatening aggression, Trump said, “I knew I was left a mess, but it’s worse than I thought.”
he had any recent contact with Obama?
“No,” he said. “I’m very disappointed that I was surveilled and so was my campaign. That’s not supposed to be happening, but I’ve been proven right.”
Although the evidence supporting Trump’s claim that Obama “wiretapped” him is incomplete, there is no question he is the victim of dirty tricks. Numerous leaks suggest that communications involving Trump’s team were intercepted by law enforcement or intelligence agencies and given to anti-Trump media outlets to undermine the new administration.
And the admission last week by Susan Rice, Obama’s national security director, that she asked for the names of some Trump associates to be “unmasked” points to a likely political purpose involving the White House.
Although two congressional committees are probing Trump’s claim, along with whether his campaign colluded with Russian hacking during the campaign, I believe a Justice Department probe of the Obama administration’s surveillance is also needed. At the very least, the leakers of national security material gathered must be found and prosecuted.
Bannon: “A good guy, but …”
Washington’s rumor mill is working overtime on the fate of presidential aide Steve Bannon, who is said to be at the center of the rampant White House infighting. When I asked the president Tuesday afternoon if he still has confidence in Bannon, who took over the campaign in mid-August, I did not get a definitive yes.
“I like Steve, but you have to remember he was not involved in my campaign until very late,” Trump said. “I had already beaten all the senators and all the governors, and I didn’t know Steve. I’m my own strategist and it wasn’t like I was going to change strategies because I was facing crooked Hillary.”
He ended by saying, “Steve is a good guy, but I told them to straighten it out or I will.”
Media’s ‘fake sources’
President Trump remains hot about the coverage he gets in the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN. When I asked about stories that cited anonymous sources “close to the president,” Trump insisted that “many of those sources are made up and I don’t believe them. Let them reveal their sources.”
“It’s fake news and fake sources,” he insisted, adding that’s why he won’t appear on CNN. As for the Times, “they’re a failing, dead paper. Lucky for them I came along. If Hillary had won, they’d be closing up shop by now.”
He’s not impressed by commentators, either. “Pundits, they knew less than my 11-year-old son,” he said. “They have zero political instinct and zero political talent.”
Xi ‘understood immediately’
The missile strike in Syria overshadowed his two-day meeting with China president Xi Jinping, who brought his wife to meet Trump and first lady Melania Trump at Mar-a-Lago. The leaders ended their first meeting just as the first missiles were launched.
“When I explained to him what we were doing, because of the gassing of children, he understood immediately,” Trump told me.
I asked about their summit, given some of the harsh things Trump has said about China.
“I was a little surprised, we had a great chemistry, not good, but great,” Trump said. “I liked him and he liked me a lot. That doesn’t mean we’re going to get along on trade or North Korea, but we had great chemistry.”
Their meeting included a priceless interlude in which Ivanka Trump and husband Jared Kushner brought their three children to meet China’s first couple. The oldest, Arabella, who turns 6 in July, is studying Mandarin and sang a Chinese song and recited Chinese poetry in honor of the guests.
What did President Xi make of that, I asked.
“He said she was speaking absolutely perfect Chinese, he couldn’t believe it,” the proud grandfather recalled. “He said, ‘She sounds like a 5-year-old girl from Beijing.’”
Ivanka posted a video of the performance and it is a huge sensation in China, making successful diplomacy in this case a Trump family affair.
GEN MATTIS SCORES CONGRESSIONAL WAIVER TO LEAD PENTAGON:
AVOIDS POLITICALLY CORRECT GAMES DURING CONFIRMATION HEARINGS.
MATTIS LOVES THE USA & RESPECTS US MILITARY.
Sources: Times of Israel, C-Span, YouTube
******* Trump’s Pentagon chief: The capital of Israel is Tel Aviv
~ "The capital of Israel that I go to, sir, is Tel Aviv, sir, because that’s where all their government people are."
Diverging from the signals the president-elect has been sending out, James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis opts to ‘stick with US policy’.
President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to head the Pentagon said Thursday that the United States should continue treating Tel Aviv as Israel’s capital, breaking with Republican members of Congress and intimations the incoming president could fulfill his campaign pledge to move the US embassy to Jerusalem.
Asked during his confirmation hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee if he supported the embassy’s relocation, retired Marine Corps general James “Mad Dog” Mattis said, “Right now I stick with the current US policy.”
Facing an hours-long session of questions from senators, he emphasized: “The capital of Israel that I go to, sir, is Tel Aviv, sir, because that’s where all their government people are.” He also noted, however, the determination was not part of his remit as defense secretary nominee.
“I would defer to the nominee of Secretary of State on that, sir,” he said.
The last three successive presidents have maintained that the future status of Jerusalem should be settled in final negotiations between the parties, as both Israelis and Palestinians claim the city as their rightful capital.
But Trump has indicated since his victory in November he will no longer honor that tradition. In December, he nominated his longtime friend and attorney David Friedman, a vocal supporter and donor to West Bank settlements, to be the next US ambassador to Israel
In a statement announcing the selection, Friedman said he expected to carry out his duties in “Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem.”
Trump also repeatedly promised during the campaign that he would move the embassy. While past presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush also vowed on the trail to do so, neither fulfilled that promise once they assumed the responsibilities of conducting America’s foreign policy.
Mattis’s position further underlines a difference with most Republican on Capitol Hill, who make up the majority in both chambers of Congress.
The Obama administration allowed passage of a United Nations Security Council Resolution last month that condemns settlements as a violation of international law. The text states that all areas Israel captured in the 1967 war — which includes East Jerusalem and the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, with the Temple Mount and Western Wall, the holiest sites in Judaism — are “occupied Palestinian territory.”
Earlier this month, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R), Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R) and Nevada Sen. Dean Heller (R) proposed the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act, which urges Trump to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the US embassy there.
Mattis declined to comment on the motion Thursday, telling the senators he needed more information on the particulars of its content.
He also diverged from most GOP lawmakers in expressing support for a two-state outcome to the Israel-Palestinian conflict.
“If it brings peace to the Middle East,” he said, while also indicating he is willing to hear alternatives despite his skepticism that another resolution to the conflict exists.
“If there’s another solution, I’d be happy to hear what it is,” he said, before later stressing America had a “vital interest” in the two sides reaching a peaceful accommodation to their decades-long dispute.
At a hearing on Wednesday, Trump’s pick for secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, also endorsed the two-state solution.
In the past, Mattis has been a critic of the Israeli settlement enterprise, asserting that its continued expansion imperiled Israel’s future as a Jewish, democratic state.
“If I’m in Jerusalem and I put 500 Jewish settlers out here to the east and there’s 10,000 Arab settlers in here, if we draw the border to include them, either it ceases to be a Jewish state or you say the Arabs don’t get to vote — apartheid,” he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in July 2013.
During that same conversation, he also said the United States pays a security price with the rest of the Arab world for its support of Israel.
Mattis, who headed the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) under President Obama from August 2010 to March 2013 (a post that has command authority for all US forces in the Middle East with the exception of Israel), did imply during Thursday’s hearing that his former boss did not always send a comforting message to Israel as an ally.
There was “a sense” in Jerusalem, Mattis said, that the administration has been “indifferent to their security concerns.” Under that assessment, he told committee members, it was “time to build trust” with the Jewish state.
Mattis also addressed the Iran nuclear deal, saying he thought it was an “imperfect” pact, but that the US had an obligation to abide by its terms. “When America gives her word, we have to live up to it and work with our allies,” he said.
During the campaign, Trump sent conflicting messages on the Iran accord, suggesting he would both abrogate the deal and enforce rigorously. Since being elected, his top advisers have indicated he will not withdraw from the deal unilaterally unless Iran violates the agreement.
RUSSIA TO OBAMA: PROVE THE KREMLIN INTERFERED IN DEMS' 2016 ELECTION LOSS:
IS OBAMA & KEY DEMS TRYING TO START WORLD WAR 3 (ARMAGEDDON)??
YES......OBAMA WANTS WAR WITH RUSSIA, IRAN, CHINA AND SYRIA.
I THINK YOU KNOW WHY (CALIPHATE).
Sources: CNN, NBC, Fox News, End Times Prophecy News, Jim Beckwith, News Max, YouTube
**** Russia Challenges US to prove campaign hacking claims or shut up
Story highlights:
Dmitry Peskov said US accusations of hacking "look unseemly" without proof
US intelligence agencies have pinned blame on Russia for election-related hacking
The United States must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it, a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was "indecent" of the United States to "groundlessly" accuse Russia of intervention in the US election campaign, Russian state news agency Tass reported.
"They should either stop talking about that or produce some proof at last. Otherwise it all begins to look unseemly," Peskov reportedly said about the latest accusations that Russia was responsible for hacker attacks.
President Barack Obama on Thursday vowed retaliatory action against Russia in the light of allegations that it meddled in the US presidential election campaign.
"I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing," he told NPR.
What is known about the hacking
• Data and thousands of emails were stolen from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, among other targets.
• US intelligence agencies in October pinned blame on Russia for campaign-related hacking.
• WikiLeaks, which published much of the information obtained by hacking, has refused to reveal its sources.
• The United States has not alleged that Russia interfered with the voting process on Election Day.
'Sophisticated tools'
A US official familiar with the election-related hacking told CNN Thursday that the operation was carried out with sophisticated hacking tools, suggesting that Putin was involved.
The source said while Putin's "fingerprints" were not on the hacking, "the nature of the operation was such that this had to be approved by top levels of the Russian government."
Russian cyberhacking activity has continued largely unabated since the election, including against US political organizations, US officials briefed on the investigation told CNN.
US President-elect Donald Trump dismissed the US intelligence community's assessment, in comments Sunday.
He suggested that there was no proof Russia had hacked the election, saying the snooping in Democratic Party servers and emails of Clinton campaign staffers could have been done by China or even someone sitting in New Jersey.
Clinton: Putin grudge was behind hack
Clinton said Thursday night that Putin's alleged involvement in the hacking of Democratic organizations during the 2016 election stemmed from a longtime grudge the Russian President has held against her.
Meanwhile, her campaign chairman, Podesta, issued a scathing rebuke of the FBI.
He wrote in a Washington Post op-ed that the bureau's "seemingly lackadaisical response to the very real Russian plot to subvert a national election" by comparison with its overzealous investigation of Clinton's emails "shows that something is deeply broken" there.
Former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili told CNN Friday that he was not surprised by the US claims against Russia.
"Well I almost was, like, vindicated when the same administration in Washington suddenly started to speak about Russian involvement in the election," he said, speaking in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev.
"They (doctors) worked on him, and worked on him but couldn't get him back," said Feeney's mother, Reba Willis, 63, of Teaneck, New Jersey in a tearful phone Monday interview one day after his death. "The doctors didn't see this coming."
But Feeney, who died from complications from a staph infection to his kidneys, may have.
And as his conditioned worsened, the former journalist who covered the death of legendary pop singer Whitney Houston nearly four years ago, laid in a hospital bed crafting his own obituary.
"I'm going to die in here," Willis said Feeney told her days before dying.
He spent a total of three weeks this month as a patient at Holy Name Medical Center in Teaneck.
Feeney, who served as the president of the New York Association of Black Journalists from 2011 until December, was known among his colleagues and friends as someone who pushed for diversity in newsrooms across the country.
He also mentored high school and college students who aspired to be professional journalists.
Newsday reporter Aisha Al-Muslim asked Feeney for career advice on a few occasions.
"He was a role model for young journalists and for anyone who sought advice," said Al-Muslin. "I'm going to remember him for his dance skills and bright smile."
Feeney, who had recently accepted an entertainment reporting position with CNN.com, joined the Daily News in 2009 first as a police reporter and later covering Harlem.
In 2010, he was named the Emerging Journalist of the Year by the National Association of Black journalists.
Feeney covered the Baltimore unrest after Freddie Gray's death for NBC News and NBCBLK, filing stories beyond the front lines of the marches; inside crowded churches, on college campuses with Black millennials stepping up as change agents, and beside the patrons of New Beginnings Barbershop.
As news of Feeney's death spread, so did the wide-ranging acknowledgements.
"He was a beacon of hope for young BLACK journalists.
He was passionate about creating a blue print for people to get ahead in the industry," said Candace Amos, a New York Daily News reporter. "He wanted to see you succeed and he would do anything in his power to make that happen."
Marlon A. Walker is an education reporter with the Atlanta Journal Constitution and Vice-President of Print for NABJ.
“It’s quickly becoming known the importance that somebody with Feeney's passion can have on people," Walker said.
"Everyone is talking about him, including people who didn't know him. For the people who did, the loss is much greater.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, the Rev. Al Sharpton, political analyst Roland Martin and Hot 97 host Charlamagne Tha God tweeted about Feeney's death.
By Monday morning, Feeney was trending on Facebook, something unthinkable for a newspaper reporter.
"The outpouring has been unbelievable," said Willis, who saved a voicemail from her elated son when he interviewed his idol, retired New York Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter.
Funeral arrangements are pending and a memorial fund has been set up in his honor, the proceeds will be sent to his family.
Sources: NBC News, BBC,Independent.co.uk, NY Mag, AJC, NY Daily News, Youtube
IRAN RELEASES U.S. PRISONERS & TO RECEIVE BILLIONS FROM OBAMA ADMIN:
ONE-SIDED NUKE DEAL NOW GOES INTO EFFECT.
Sources: Washington Post, Fox News, PBS, Youtube
A plane carrying Washington Post correspondent Jason Rezaian and two other Americans released by Iran left Tehran en route to Europe on Sunday after the implementation of a landmark agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.
Once the prisoner flight was well on its way, the Obama administration announced new sanctions related to participation in Iran’s ballistic missile program. The sanctions, which applied to 11 persons and companies, were issued under U.S. restrictions that remain in place despite the lifting Saturday of international sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program.
As the Swiss plane carrying the three Americans was airborne, President Obama hailed the implementation of the nuclear agreement and the prisoner exchange with Iran that led to the release of the imprisoned U.S. citizens. In televised remarks Sunday morning, he said that although “profound differences” remain between Washington and Tehran, the Iranian people now have a chance to end their isolation and pursue closer ties with the rest of the world.
U.S. and European officials lifted the harshest economic sanctions against Tehran after the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog certified that the Islamic republic had fully complied with promises to curtail key parts of its nuclear program. Hours before diplomats in Vienna heralded the official activation of the nuclear deal, Iran confirmed the release of Rezaian and the other American detainees, set free in exchange for U.S. clemency offered to seven Iranians charged or imprisoned for sanctions violations and the dismissal of outstanding charges against 14 Iranians outside the United States.
Rezaian and two other released Americans were flown out of Tehran on Sunday, after a delay. They were expected to go to Switzerland, then to a U.S. military facility in Germany to be examined by medical personnel. One of the Americans, Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari, did not fly out with the others, U.S. officials said.
We can confirm that our detained U.S. citizens have been released and that those who wished to depart Iran have left,” a senior administration official said. “We have no further information to share at this time and would ask that everyone respect the privacy of these individuals and their families.”
A fifth American was released in a separate gesture by Iran and left Iran individually before the plane carrying the three Americans departed.
The coordinated moves cemented a major diplomatic victory for the Obama administration, which won significant nuclear concessions from Iran in an effort to defuse an international crisis that threatened to spark a new Middle East war. The agreement also frees Iran from crippling economic sanctions and opens the way for ending decades of diplomatic and economic isolation.
“This evening, we are really reminded once again of diplomacy’s power to tackle significant challenges,” Secretary of State John F. Kerry said after the implementation was announced. “We have approached this challenge with the firm belief that exhausting diplomacy before choosing war is an imperative. And we believe that today marks the benefits of that choice.”
But the agreement also contains significant political risk for a White House that is staking its legacy on Iran’s willingness to comply with unprecedented curbs and extensive monitoring of its nuclear program. The pact — which has been repeatedly condemned by the Israeli government as well as by members of Congress from both parties — drew fresh attacks Saturday from Republican presidential contenders, some of whom blasted the deal as a sellout to Iran’s clerical rulers.
The nuclear pact calls on Iran to dismantle key nuclear equipment in a deal designed to ensure that Iranian officials could never accumulate enough fissile material to build a nuclear bomb. The agreement also requires unprecedented inspections and monitoring covering all aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, from uranium mining to research facilities.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif echoed Kerry’s remarks, saying on Twitter that “diplomacy requires patience, but we all know that it sure beats the alternatives.” Implementation of the deal, Zarif said, meant that “it’s now time for all — especially Muslim nations — to join hands and rid the world of violent extremism. Iran is ready.”
The release of prisoners had not been officially part of negotiations between Iran and the six world powers: the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany. But Kerry frequently raised the plight of imprisoned U.S. citizens during last year’s nuclear talks.
The Obama administration had come under heavy criticism for concluding the nuclear accord without winning the release of American detainees, including Rezaian, 39, whose 544-day detention is the longest ever by a Western journalist in Iran. White House officials confirmed that the swap was clinched during months of secret talks that gained momentum in the days before the nuclear pact was formally implemented.
Friends and colleagues at The Washington Post are elated by the wonderful news that Jason Rezaian has been released from Evin Prison and has safely left the country with his wife, Yeganeh Salehi,” said Frederick J. Ryan Jr., publisher of The Post. “We are enormously grateful to all who played a role in securing his release. Our deep appreciation also goes to the many government leaders, journalists, human rights advocates and others around the world who have spoken out on Jason’s behalf and against the harsh confinement that was so wrongly imposed upon him,” he said.
“Now a free man, Jason will be reunited with his family, including his brother Ali, his most effective and tireless advocate. We look forward to the joyous occasion of welcoming him back to the Washington Post newsroom,” Ryan said.
Iran’s judiciary announced the release in Tehran as part of an exchange. The United States is releasing seven people charged with violating sanctions against Iran, U.S. and Iranian officials said.
A senior U.S. official said the “Iranians wanted a goodwill gesture” in response to the release of the Americans. A list of Iranians submitted to U.S. authorities was “whittled down” to exclude any crimes related to violence or terrorism, said the official, one of several who spoke on the condition of anonymity under administration ground rules.
Another official said the exchange was a “one-time arrangement because it was an opportunity to bring Americans home” and should not be considered something that would “encourage this behavior in the future” by Iran.
The officials did not tie the release directly to the nuclear talks and said they had not wanted the detained Americans to be “used as leverage” in the negotiations. But, they said, completion of the nuclear deal last July greatly accelerated talks about the prisoners.
In addition to Rezaian, the Americans freed Saturday included Saeed Abedini, 35, of Boise, Idaho; Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, 32, of Flint, Mich.; and Khosravi-Roodsari, U.S. and Iranian officials said.
A fifth American, identified as language student Matt Trevithick, was also released Saturday but was not part of the exchange deal. Trevithick’s parents said in a statement that he had been held for 40 days in Evin Prison. A senior U.S. official said Trevithick, 30, has already left Iran.
Abedini is a Christian pastor who had been imprisoned since July 2012 for organizing home churches. Hekmati is a former Marine who spent more than four years in prison on spying charges following his arrest in August 2011 during a visit to see his grandmother.
The detention of Khosravi-Roodsari had not been previously publicized. Iranian state television identified him as a businessman. Little else was known about him.
A senior administration official said of Trevithick, “We wanted him, obviously, to be a direct part of this, and made clear to Iranians that [his release] would be an appropriate humanitarian gesture.”
The exchange quickly became political fodder in the United States among Republicans vying for the GOP presidential nomination.
Republican front-runner Donald Trump said it was “a total disgrace” that the release of the Americans took so long. “This should have been done three, four years ago, when the [nuclear] deal was struck. Before the deal was made . . . they should have said, ‘We want our prisoners back,’ ” Trump said at a rally in New Hampshire.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said in a television interview Saturday: “We’d be very happy for the families of the Americans who are going to be home and for those Americans, but I’d also want to hear what the other side of the deal is, if this president is releasing more terrorists from Guantanamo to go back and reenter the war on terror. . . . We shouldn’t have to swap prisoners. These folks were taken illegally in violation of international law, and they should have been released without condition.”
Rezaian’s ordeal damaged his health, drew protests from media and human rights groups, and hampered efforts to improve relations between Washington and Tehran. It also exposed fault lines and infighting in Iran’s opaque political system, where Rezaian and other detained Americans appeared to become pawns in a larger internal struggle between hard-liners and reformists seeking to improve ties with the West.
Rezaian was tried last year behind closed doors on vague charges of espionage and other alleged offenses and was sentenced to an unspecified prison term.
His 2014 arrest and subsequent trial and conviction in Iran’s secretive Revolutionary Court system — on charges that were never publicly disclosed or substantiated — appeared to reflect a power play by hard-liners fiercely loyal to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, against more moderate reformist elements under President Hassan Rouhani. The hard-liners control Iran’s security forces, intelligence apparatus, judiciary and most other levers of power, while Rouhani — though answerable to Khamenei — has been given relatively free rein to manage Iran’s foreign affairs and improve its economy.
In recent weeks, Iran took significant steps to meet its obligations under the deal.
Increased U.S.-Iranian cooperation appeared to be on display Wednesday when Iran released 10 U.S. sailors within a day after they were seized by Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps naval forces in the Persian Gulf. The Americans were on two small riverine boats that strayed into Iranian waters.
Against this backdrop, the signs of rapprochement raised hopes for a resolution in Rezaian’s case.
Rezaian was arrested along with his wife when security forces raided their home July 22, 2014. Yeganeh Salehi, 31, a journalist who worked for the Abu Dhabi newspaper the National, was released on bail in October, but Rezaian languished in Evin Prison for months without trial or even specific charges.
Rezaian holds both U.S. and Iranian citizenship. But Iran, which does not recognize dual nationality, barred any U.S. role in the case, including consular visits by Swiss diplomats representing U.S. interests. Diplomatic relations between Washington and Tehran were severed in 1980 during the Iranian hostage crisis.
The last of four Revolutionary Court sessions was held in August, but it was not until October that a court spokesman announced a conviction — without providing any details. In November, the court said Rezaian was sentenced to a prison term, again with no elaboration.
In the meantime, Iranian officials floated the idea of a prisoner swap with the United States. Rouhani even suggested that Tehran could free Rezaian and at least two other Iranian American prisoners if Washington reciprocated by releasing 19 Iranian citizens convicted in the United States of circumventing sanctions.
As if to buttress that proposal, state-run news media in Iran then reported that Rezaian was accused of “spying on Iran’s nuclear programs” and giving the U.S. government information on people and companies evading sanctions.
ISRAELI PM Benjamin Netanyahu was Wrong to accept U.S. House Speaker Johh Boehner's recent Political invite to address Congress regarding imposing more Sanctions on IRAN.
GOP leaders would Never have done this Politically Spiteful thing to ROMNEY or BUSH or MCCAIN if they were in the White House.
I too Support ISRAEL but Netanyahu was Wrong!
Just think of the Media Optics if Pres OBAMA were to address ISRAELI leaders without Netanyahu's Blessing?
So does Pres OBAMA hate JEWS?
No of course Not!
But Pres OBAMA already has an Active NUKE Deal with IRAN in place.
What does PM Netanyahu hope to accomplish by addressing Congress next Month?
Does Benjamin Netanyahu want Pres OBAMA to Breach this Active NUKE Deal with IRAN for the sake of Politics?
(2016 U.S. Presidential Election)
By the way.........
What about Professional Courtesy for LEADERSHIP and RESPECT for a sitting Elected U.S. President?
Israeli officials are considering amending the format of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's planned address to the U.S. Congress next month to try to calm some of the partisan furore the Iran-focused speech has provoked.
Netanyahu is due to address a joint session of Congress about Iran's nuclear programme on March 3, just two weeks before Israeli elections, following an invitation from John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the house.
Boehner's invitation has caused consternation in both Israel and the United States, largely because it is seen as Netanyahu, a hawk on Iran, working with the Republicans to thumb their noses at President Barack Obama's policy on Iran.
It is also seen as putting Netanyahu's political links to the Republicans ahead of Israel's nation-to-nation ties with the United States, its strongest and most important ally, while serving as a pre-election campaign booster.
As a result, Israeli officials are considering whether Netanyahu should speak to a closed-door session of Congress, rather than in a prime-time TV address, so as to drain some of the intensity from the event, a source said.
Another option is for the prime minister to make his speech at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington the same week, rather than in Congress.
"The issue has been under discussion for a week," said a source close to the prime minister's office. "(Netanyahu) is discussing it with Likud people. Some say he should give up on the speech, others that he should go through with it."
But Netanyahu told voters from the Russian speaking community on Monday evening that he was determined to discuss Israel's objections in Washington to an emerging deal with Iran but he did not say if that meant a public speech in Congress.
"I am ... determined to go to Washington to present Israel's position to the members of Congress and the American people," Netanyahu said, repeating that nuclear weapons in Iran's hands would constitute an existential threat to Israel.
An opinion poll by Israel's Army Radio on Monday said 47 percent of people think Netanyahu should cancel the address, while 34 percent say he should go ahead with it.
Since the issue arose, there are signs it is having an impact on his poll ratings ahead of the March 17 election.
Obama said his decision not to meet with Netanyahu followed basic protocol of not meeting with world leaders before an election.
"Some of this just has to do with how we do business, and I think it's important for us to maintain these protocols because the U.S.-Israeli relationship is not about a particular party," Obama said at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Washington.
A poll by the Times of Israel on Monday said Netanyahu's Likud would win 23 seats in the 120-seat Knesset, four fewer than the centre-left opposition. Earlier polls showed Likud and the opposition alliance neck-and-neck on 24 seats.
Speaking on radio last week, Israel's deputy foreign minister suggested Netanyahu had been "misled" about the speech, believing it to be bipartisan when the Democrats were not entirely on board.
While that may have created some room for Netanyahu to get out of it if the pressure at home and from Washington becomes too great, it may be too late.
If he withdraws now it may make him look weak with core voters.
Furthermore, he needs an opportunity to play up his tough-on-Iran credentials before election, with national security an overriding issue for voters.
Sources: BBC; Reuters; USA Today; Charlottesville Police Dept; Youtube
It doesn't take rocket science to figure out where these damaging leaks originate. They're coming from the White House plain & simple!
While its true NO White House Administration has ever operated without Leaks, this string of Seriously Damaging Leaks from 2009 to 2012 are much more frequent than usual.
I've long Suspected ever since the Underwear Bomber incident, that Information being leaked to Media Sources was coming directly from the White House.
Such Extremely Sensitive Highly Classified Information could NOT have come from Congress Members or lower level White House Employees.
It had to come from ONLY those Executive Employees closest to Pres. Obama.
Thus the Information is coming from someone within Pres. Obama's Inner Circle.
The Leaks may be helping Pres. Obama politically but its Hurting America's National & International Security.
These Leaks are also putting our Troops in Danger & hurting our Relationships with other World Leaders.
The FBI is looking into what is believed to be leaks of top secret details about cyberattacks against Iran, as the White House and GOP trade barbs over the release of sensitive national security data.
The tense sparring underscored how the handling of classified information and national security has suddenly escalated into a presidential campaign-season issue, like no time in recent memory.
Georgia Sen Saxby Chambliss, one of the Republicans leading the charge against the Obama administration regarding the leaks, told CNN that the FBI investigation has begun.
In a joint statement to the network from the leadership of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, lawmakers said: 'In recent weeks, we have become increasingly concerned at the continued leaks regarding sensitive intelligence programs and activities, including specific details of sources and methods.'
The statement came from Sen Chambliss; Sen Dianne Feinstein of California; Rep Mike Rogers of Michigan and Rep C.A. 'Dutch' Ruppersberger, of Maryland. The statement went on: "These disclosures have seriously interfered with ongoing intelligence programs and have put at jeopardy our intelligence capability to act in the future.
'Each disclosure puts American lives at risk, makes it more difficult to recruit assets, strains the trust of our partners and threatens imminent and irreparable damage to our national security in the face of urgent and rapidly adapting threats worldwide.'
The group also announced a news conference on the subject for Thursday.
Meanwhile, the White House and Republican Sen John McCain of Arizona, were embroiled in a war of words yesterday, as each side accused the other of being 'grossly irresponsible' in connection with leaks of national security data.
White House spokesman Jay Carney denied allegations made by McCain a day earlier that the apparent leaks by administration officials must have been politically motivated to boost President Obama's stature ahead of his attempted re-election this fall.
McCain fired back with a heated statement repeating his suspicions, declaring 'this is not a game' and 'laws have apparently been broken.'
He called for prosecution of whoever is responsible for the leaks, which have included information about a U.S. cyber warfare program aimed at thwarting Iran's nuclear program.
Congressional intelligence chiefs also expressed deep unease about the recent leaks and said they would press the Obama administration to investigate, as well as considering how laws could be strengthened to stop it happening again.
'The accelerating pace of such disclosures, the sensitivity of the matters in question, and the harm caused to our national security interests is alarming and unacceptable,' the leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees from both political parties said in a statement.
'These disclosures have seriously interfered with ongoing intelligence programs and have put at jeopardy our intelligence capability to act in the future,' the lawmakers said.
McCain, who challenged Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign, took to the Senate floor on Wednesday along with Chambliss to call for a special counsel to investigate the recent string of leaks, saying they appeared to have been made for political advantage.
The leaks have included detailed reports on a classified counterterrorism 'kill list' of militants targeted in drone strikes, and an undercover investigation targeted on Yemen-based militants involved in building underwear bombs designed to foil airport security.
Carney, on Obama's plane on a flight to San Francisco on Wednesday, said the administration 'takes all appropriate and necessary steps to prevent leaks of classified information or sensitive information that could risk ongoing counter terrorism or intelligence operations.'
'Any suggestion that this administration has authorized intentional leaks of classified information for political gain is grossly irresponsible.'
'No, what is grossly irresponsible is U.S. officials divulging some of the most highly classified programs involving the most important national security priorities facing our nation today,' McCain shot back in his statement.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who charged members of Obama administration of leaking classified information for political gain, Wednesday called those who leaked the info "grossly irresponsible," using the same words that White House spokesperson Jay Carney levied at McCain. Earlier in the day, Carney told reporters, "Any suggestion that this administration has authorized intentional leaks of classified info for political gain is grossly irresponsible," Carney said.
McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, fired back: "No, what is grossly irresponsible is U.S. officials divulging some of the most highly classified programs involving the most important national security priorities facing our nation today."
McCain first called attention to the issue with a fiery speech on the Senate floor Tuesday evening, pointing to a new book by New York Times journalist David Sanger that reveals U.S.-Israeli cybercampaigns used against Iran.
McCain charged members of the administration with leaking classified information and called for an investigation by a special counsel. He also called for people to be prosecuted if guilt is found. His Democratic counterpart on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., agreed to hold a hearing to investigate.
"It is difficult to escape the conclusion that these recent leaks of highly classified information, all of which have the effect of making the President look strong and decisive on national security in the middle of his re-election campaign, have a deeper political motivation," Mcain said.
McCain added: "Over the course of these congressional hearings and other investigations, I would hope that the motivations for these leaks is fully examined and discussed. These leaks clearly were not done in the interest of national security or to reveal corrupt or illegal actions about which the public has a right to know, as in the case of legitimate whistleblowers."
A bipartisan group of lawmakers that lead the House and Senate intelligence committees also expressed concern, calling possible leaks "unacceptable."
"In recent weeks, we have become increasingly concerned at the continued leaks regarding sensitive intelligence programs and activities, including specific details of sources and methods. The accelerating pace of such disclosures, the sensitivity of the matters in question, and the harm caused to our national security interests is alarming and unacceptable," Sens. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., and Reps. Mike Rogers, R-Mich. and Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md.
The four members of the intelligence committees also called the leaks "damaging and intolerable." They plan to modify and strengthen legislation regarding leaks. "We believe that significant changes are needed, in legislation, in the culture of the agencies that deal with classified information, in punishing leaks, and in the level of leadership across the government to make clear that these types of disclosures will not stand," the lawmakers said in the statement.
Sources: CBS News, CNN, Daily Mail, Fox News, Youtube
Due to Occupy Protesters & other Organizations rallying against Global Leaders attending the 2012 G8 Summit, the Meeting was moved to Camp David for Pres. Obama's Safety.
The Middle Class & Poor are Fighting Back against the G8 because the Global Financial System Is FOREVER Rigged To ONLY PROTECT The Rich & Very Rich!
At the Annual G8 Summit Meetings Our Global Leaders come together to Gamble Away more of Our Freedom on Risky Financial Plans & Ideas with the use of Taxpayers' MONEY!
In other words it does NOT matter what the People Want or Need, Global Leaders are going to FORCE their Bitter Pill Financial Decisions down our throats anyway.
Even in America its all about PROTECTING THE RICH, But Make the Poor Suffer, while continuing to PROTECT THE RICH!
Now Please Don't Get It Twisted!
I have absolutely NOTHING at all against people who are Financially Successful.
Every Human Being on Planet Earth Should Have Equal Opportunities To Achieve Some Level Of Financial Success As Mark Zuckerberg Did!
If NOT Billionaires, Then Millionaires Or Just Extremely Comfortable.
In fact I Admire & Applaud ALL People who became Financially Successful via Innovation & Hard Work.
Please Understand that I am NOT one of those American Citizens who Opposes Wealth because I am NOT one of those Individuals.
I LIKE MONEY OK!
I'm just saying that our World's Financial System, including the United States, is Currently NOT Set up to allow Middle Class & Low Income People to Achieve the Same Level of Upward Mobility & Success as that of Most Wealthy People.
Thus the Annual G8 Summit Meeting is NOT about Global Economics, Human Rights, Voting Rights, JOBS, REAL Financial Reform, REAL Systemic Reform or PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
Its actually just more of the SAME Status Quo Stuff.
CONTINUING TO PROTECT THE RICH WHILE MAKING THE POOR PAY MORE!
Let’s be REAL for just a moment shall we?
The Global Financial System Is FOREVER Rigged To ONLY Protect The Rich & Very Rich!
More than likely that's the way it will ALWAYS be until Jesus returns!
So much for the Good of Common, Everyday People.
So Why VOTE?
Why do we even continue to VOTE if what WE Need is Never Considered in Local & Global Political Decisions which Affect us?
My VOTE may NOT make a significant mathematical difference in the outcome of an Election or Primary but I will continue to VOTE anyway.
And…..
Parents must instill in their Youth the Importance Of Expressing Our Individual Voices Via The Democratic Process Of VOTING.
i.e., THE DEMOCRACY PROJECT!
Isn't that why the Process of Political Democracy was established?
Why VOTE?
Because as an African-American citizen living in America, I recognize the Blood & Sacrifice My Ancestors & BLACK Leaders of yesterday made so that I could walk into a 21st Century Exit Poll Booth and LEGALLY Cast my Ballot to Elect Politicians. Even Politicians who LIE to ME!
Nevertheless We Must Continue To VOTE & Elect Leaders, even if only for Symbolic Reasons.
Because Voting is the ONLY Way Our Voices will be Heard right?
Wait a minute!
Were any of YOU who Voted in the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 Elections & Primaries Invited to Attend the 2012 G8 Summit World Meeting?
Three anti-NATO protesters charged with terrorism conspiracy planned to attack four Chicago police stations, the local campaign headquarters for President Barack Obama and the home of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, prosecutors alleged in court documents Saturday.
While friends of the three men insisted they were just operating a home brewery, prosecutors stated that police found a gun that fires mortar rounds, swords, a hunting bow, ninja-like throwing stars and knives with brass knuckle handles. The beer operation, prosecutors added, was used to fill bottles with gasoline that would later be thrown as Molotov cocktails.
The three were being held on charges of conspiracy to commit terrorism, possession of an explosive or incendiary device and providing material support. The men were identified as 20-year-old Brian Church, of Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.; 24-year-old Jared Chase, of Keene, N.H.; and 24-year-old Brent Vincent Betterly, of Oakland Park, Mass.
Defense attorneys told a judge on Saturday that undercover police were the ones who brought the Molotov cocktails, and that their clients were entrapped, the Associated Press reported.
Bond of $1.5 million was set for each defendant.
Michael Deutsch, one of their attorneys, later told reporters outside the courtroom that it was all a setup. Two informants "ingratiated themselves" with the three men and "this was all their idea," he insisted.
But Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy told reporters "the evidence speaks for itself" about what he called an "imminent threat."
"They were making the bombs ... (and had) directions on how to implement this," added Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez.
Sarah Gelsomino, another attorney for the men, earlier said they were "absolutely in shock and have no idea where these charges are coming from."
"The National Lawyers Guild deplores the charges against Occupy activists in the strongest degree," Gelsomino said in a statement decrying the charges.
Six others initially arrested have been released. They were all detained in a raid Wednesday on a home in Bridgeport on Chicago's South Side, NBCChicago.com reported. Beer or bombs?
But the group of protesters said what police thought was suspicious was actually a home beer-brewing operation.
“We were handcuffed to a bench and our legs were shackled together. We were not told what was happening,” one of those detained but later released, Darrin Ammussek, told NBCChicago.com.
“I believe very strongly in non-violence, and if I had seen anything that even resembled any plans or anything like that, we wouldn’t have been there," he added.
He claimed that during 18 hours in custody, police never told him why he was arrested, read him his rights or allowed him to make a phone call, The Associated Press reported. He said he remained handcuffed to a bench, even after asking to use a restroom.
"There were guards walking by making statements into the door along the lines of 'hippie,' 'communist," 'pinko,'" a tired-looking Ammussek told reporters just after his release.
NBCChicago.com said the National Lawyers Guild had threatened legal action if the detained protesters were not released or charged by Friday night.
“They came in with guns drawn and broke into a unit that was not housing protesters in order to get into another unit in the building that was housing protesters,” said the guild's Kris Hermes.
Security has been high throughout the city in preparation for the summit, where delegations from about 60 countries, including 50 heads of state, will discuss the war in Afghanistan and European missile defense.
Among the pre-NATO protests planned for Saturday was a march on the home of Mayor Emanuel. The big show will be on Sunday, the start of the two-day NATO summit, when thousands of protesters are expected to march 2½ miles from a band shell on Lake Michigan to the McCormick Place convention center, where delegates will be meeting.
On Friday, Chicago police on bicycles and foot tailed activists through the streets of the city, but ignored taunts and went out of their way to make as few arrests as possible. Protesters made a lot of noise and tried to evade police, but otherwise were relatively uneventful.
In all, police said there was a single arrest on a charge of aggravated battery of a police officer. Another man was briefly taken into custody, but he was released a short time later after being questioned by police, a department spokesman said.
Also, officers were seen trying to arrest a man who scaled a bridge tower and pulled down part of a NATO banner. Earlier, police handcuffed a man at the end of a noisy but largely peaceful rally organized by the nation's largest nurses union.
From the police side of the protest line, it went largely how Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy envisioned it earlier this month when he said, "We're not going to lock somebody up for dropping a banana peel."
Michael Olstewski, 22, a recent music school graduate who came to Chicago from Atlanta, one of hundreds of protesters who took to the streets on Friday for a spontaneous march, said protesters may be waiting to make a big statement.
He said he didn't do anything to get arrested Friday, "but later in the week ... If I feel it's strategic and a powerful statement" he would provoke police into arresting him.
Israel will not be invited to NATO’s May 20-21 summit in Chicago, the alliance’s top official said Friday. But he denied that alliance member Turkey had blocked Israel’s participation.
Instead, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the reason is because Israel does not participate in NATO’s main military missions.
News reports have claimed that Turkey blocked Israel’s participation because of the raid in 2010 by Israeli troops on ships heading to Gaza in which eight Turks and a Turkish-American died.
NATO has a system of partnerships with dozens of nations across the globe such as the Mediterranean Dialogue, a NATO outreach program with seven friendly nations, including Israel.
In the past, partner nations did not usually attend the alliance’s summits. But Fogh Rasmussen said 13 would do so this time.
“At the Lisbon summit (in 2010), we made clear that we would enhance dialogue and cooperation with partner nations ... because in today’s world security challenges know no borders, and no country or alliance can deal with most of them on their own,” he told journalists.
Two other members of the Mediterranean group, Jordan and Morocco, are among them. But Fogh Rasmussen said Israel is not because it does not participate in missions in Afghanistan and Kosovo.
“Israel has not been invited to attend the summit because Israel is neither a participant in ISAF nor in KFOR ... no one has blocked an invitation because it’s not been an issue,” Fogh Rasmussen said. ISAF and KFOR are acronyms for coalition forces in Afghanistan and Kosovo.
Earlier this year, Turkey scuttled a plan to include an Israeli warship in a NATO-run flotilla patrolling the Mediterranean.
In the past, Israeli warships and air force jets have joined in some NATO exercises, but Israel’s participation in the naval operation would the first time its armed forces have taken part in one of the alliance’s military operations.
Representatives of about 60 nations and international organizations will attend the Chicago conference. Partner nations include include Sweden, Switzerland, Qatar, Georgia, Australia and New Zealand.
Representatives of Russia and several Central Asian states also have been invited to discuss the war in Afghanistan — the summit’s main focus — “because they provide important transit arrangements to the benefit of our operation,” Fogh Rasmussen said.
The alliance has repeatedly said it is prepared to enhance practical cooperation with all partner nations in the region, including Israel. But some members have opposed past attempts to forge closer cooperation with the Jewish state, saying that could hurt the alliance’s relations with other Muslim countries, including Afghanistan, which remains NATO’s top operational priority.
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
