News Releases

Turkish Shootdown: “Planned Provocation”?


JOHN QUIGLEY,Quigley.2 at
Professor emeritus of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley has written extensively about both the Mideast and Russia. His books include The Ruses for War: American Interventionism Since World War II.

He said today: “Turkey claims it warned the Russian plane ten times, but the maps they released indicate that the Russian planes flew into a very small area of Turkey that juts into Syria. So, if Turkey is telling the truth, the fastest way for the Russian plane to get out would have been to keep going straight ahead. So that part of the Turkey story and justification for shooting down the Russian planes doesn’t add up.

“More broadly, the entire situation seems to be isolating the U.S. since it’s the most powerful nation continuing to insist on the removal of [Syrian President Bashar] Assad. Putin’s position that countries should come together to defeat ISIS plays much better globally.”

Wikileaks notes: “’17 seconds’ — how long Russian jet spent in Turkish airspace according to Turkey’s letter to UN Security Council.” See the letter from the Turkish ambassador.

From the British Telegraph: “Turkey shooting down plane was ‘planned provocation’ says Russia, as rescued pilot claims he had no warning,”

See from Moon of Alabama: “The Context Of Yesterday’s Turkish Attack Against The Russian Jet.”

“Myth of Thanksgiving” and Mideast Policy Today

“American Progress” by John Gast, 1872

Dunbar-Ortiz is author or editor of seven books, including An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States. She wrote the piece “The Myth of Thanksgiving.” She said today: “Once again, we find Europeans and U.S. Americans as victims of irrational and evil forces. Somehow, the endless U.S. and NATO aggressive wars and threats of war, the terror created by continued bombing and drone strikes in the Middle East and Southwest Asia, with their majority Muslim populations, fade into the background, as if they started these wars. How dare anyone strike back at the god-given Christian empire? The centuries-long Christian Crusades against Muslims, then more centuries of European colonization of Muslim countries, with imperialist ventures and wars increasingly lead by the U.S. in the 20th century, are retroactively justified by the intentional killing of 149 French civilians. This is an old story and routine of Western aggression imperialism. The ‘weaponization of grief,’ as this counterinsurgent war tactic has been called, is one of the lowest forms of deception.

“Thanksgiving, is a prototype of that tactic — the enduring myth of grieving religious dissidents (of course accompanied by a mercenary security detail larger than their own numbers) invaded and occupied another people’s territory, and those merciless savages whose territory it was were not properly appreciative despite the intruders alleged kindness. A few years later, with more boat loads of religious dissidents arriving and expropriating more farms and food supplies, the Indigenous communities regrouped and began to fight back, and the ‘weaponization of grief’ took hold justifying settler violence and theft of land and resources. This origin story of the United States, repeated in the militaristic march across North America, as well as overseas, forms the core of U.S. counterinsurgency, regeneration through violence, which produces responses that allows the aggressor to assume the mantel of the aggrieved. Anyone who questions this stance and brings up history, especially since 9/11, is slapped down and stomped on.”

Debunking Trump — and his Critics — on 9/11 and Torture

Statements by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump — on post-9/11 celebrations and on torture “working” — have drawn the ire of many. However, the following experts on each of these two issues show how both Trump and many of his political detractors are missing the underlying substance:

Trump has drawn criticism for falsely claiming that “There were people over in New Jersey that were watching it, a heavy Arab population, that were cheering as the buildings came down. Not good.” Ketcham, an investigative reporter whose work has appeared in many publications including Harper’sVanity Fair, Vice, and GQ and said today: “Trump’s ignorant conflation unwittingly opens the door for the American public to revisit one of the most important and least discussed mysteries of 9/11: the possibility that Israeli spies were tracking the hijackers prior to the attacks.” Ketcham notes that virtually none of those taking issue with Trump’s remarks are noting the underlying factual story that he seems to be conflating, or, if they are, the are not representing the facts accurately. He wrote the piece “The Israeli ‘Art Student’ Mystery” for Salon.

Ketcham has written extensively about one of the major unexplained aspects of 9/11. He wrote the piece “What Did Israel Know in Advance of the 9/11 Attacks” for Counterpunch in 2007 [PDF]. Shortly after, Ketcham was on “Democracy Now” and host Amy Goodman noted: “Freelance journalist Christopher Ketcham has just published a comprehensive piece … The article highlights various interconnected stories: the five Israeli ‘movers’ who witnesses say were cheering after the first plane struck the World Trade Center; the so-called Israeli art students who were living in concentrated areas where hijackers were living in the United States; and how two of the hijackers ended up on the watchlist weeks before 9/11.”

JASON LEOPOLD, jasonleopold at, @JasonLeopold
Trump has recently said: “Don’t kid yourself, folks. It works, okay? It works. Only a stupid person would say it doesn’t work.”

Senior investigative reporter at Vice, Leopold said today: “The problem over the last 13 years is that the general public has no idea how how torture actually ‘works.’ It doesn’t work to get information like in a fictional ‘ticking time bomb’ scenario — a terrorist would obviously just give you bad information. But, if you want to get false confessions, it absolutely works. It’s shown in notes from a CIA psychologist.” Leopold co-wrote the piece “CIA Psychologist’s Notes Reveal True Purpose Behind Bush’s Torture Program.”

Leopold also co-wrote “‘Guidebook to False Confessions': Key Document John Yoo Used to Draft Torture Memo Released.”

He added: “Torture techniques have been used in a way to force detainees to compel them to give false confessions. The techniques would get captors full control, including getting the captives to say things that the captors wanted to hear, like ‘Iraq has WMDs’ or ‘al-Qaeda is looking to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge’ — to use these techniques to justify going into war. It’s called exploitation.”

Leopold published Abu Zubaydah’s diaries for Al Jazeera America. Leopold notes that Abu Zubaydah “personally wrote that he lied to Pakistanis and told them what they wanted to hear when they tortured him using the same techniques CIA used in order to get torture to stop.” Leopold’s books include News Junkie and The Other Abu Zubaidah: From Hopeful Immigrant to FBI Informant.

Also, see “The Phony Torture Debate: Why Trump is Wrong about Waterboarding — It’s Probably Not What You Think” by Sam Husseini, which fleshes out the case of Ibn Shaykh al-Libi, who “confessed” that Iraq had WMDs to make the torture stop.

Tweets in a Time of Terror: Clinton and Carson Target Free Speech

JILLIAN YORK, jillian at, @JillianCYork, @censored
York is a writer and activist whose work lies at the intersection of technology and policy. Based in Berlin, she is director for International Freedom of Expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where she works on issues of free expression, privacy, and digital security. She is co-founder of

York recently co-wrote the piece “Tweets in the Time of Terror: U.S. Candidates Take Aim At Free Speech,” which states: “Both Ben Carson and Hillary Clinton, within a span of 24 hours, went on the record as saying that a necessary action in defeating ISIS is for social media platforms — on which much of our everyday speech takes place — to shut down speech. Free speech stands at the core of the American ethos, but it seems two of the country’s leading presidential candidates are all too willing — even eager — to limit that core civil liberty. …

“‘We must not allow [ISIS’] macabre murder videos and threats to be promoted anywhere,’ said Carson, referencing the hacker group Anonymous as an inspiration for his policy. Clinton’s statement suggested the potential for censorship beyond the speech of terrorists: ‘There is no doubt we have to do a better job contesting online space, including websites and chat rooms where jihadists communicate with followers,’ she said. In a Washington Post op-ed, Carson proposes an increase in government technical surveillance. ‘We can monitor social media by expanding the search algorithms already in place to safeguard against inappropriate behavior, including religious hate speech,’ he writes. ‘Once flagged, we can notify platform providers and encourage them to censor communications (and block users) that violate the terms of constructive discourse.’ …

“Advocating for privately-enforced domestic censorship in response to foreign attacks shows a fundamental proclivity for using external events to limit the freedoms of American citizens. One shudders to think of what response these candidates would advocate in the case of a terror attack on the American homeland. Any serious presidential candidate needs to show the American people how they would address the root causes of terrorism — not violate the integrity of the civil liberties of its own citizens. The American electorate must demand their candidates offer a thorough explanation for any attempt to compromise the free exchange of ideas that social media affords us just because it’s a low-hanging fruit.” notes: “Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Google+ have an outsized impact in our social lives. We treat these platforms as a ‘public sphere,’ using them to discuss issues both controversial and menial, to connect with friends far and near, and to engage in activism and debate. But while these platforms may be used by the public, they’re ultimately owned by private companies with their own rules and systems of governance that control — and in some cases, censor — users’ content.”

For background and debate on related issues, see from Glenn Greenwald: “Should Twitter, Facebook and Google Executives be the Arbiters of What We See and Read?” and “Greenwald’s Free Speech Absolutism and Twitter’s Foley Ban” by @RancidTarzie.

Saudi Arabia: * Death for “Apostasy” * U.S. Weapons Fueling Wars

ALI AL-AHMED, alialahmedx at, @AliAlAhmed_en
Al-Ahmed is director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, which just released a report on “The Saudi government school in Paris and the content of its schoolbooks that promote terrorism and hatred.”

Reuters reports: “A Saudi Arabian court has sentenced a Palestinian poet to death for apostasy, abandoning his Muslim faith, according to trial documents seen by Human Rights Watch, its Middle East researcher Adam Coogle said on Friday. Ashraf Fayadh was detained by the country’s religious police in 2013 in Abha, in southwest Saudi Arabia, and then rearrested and tried in early 2014.” Middle East Eye reports: “The exact charges under which Fayadh was initially held were not made clear, although some have suggested that his arrest was linked to his publication of a video showing religious police in Abha beating a young man in public. … Saudi Arabia has put to death nearly 150 people so far this year, the highest figure in two decades. Most people are executed by beheading with a sword, a method Saudi authorities say is more humane than other alternatives.”

Al-Ahmed has written extensively about Saudi Arabia, including apostasy. See his piece “This medieval Saudi education system must be reformed.”

WILLIAM HARTUNG, williamhartung55 at, @williamhartung
Hartung is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy and a senior adviser to the Security Assistance Monitor.

He just wrote the piece, “U.S. Arms Sales Are Fueling Mideast Wars,” which states: “The majority of the Obama administration’s major arms sales have gone to the Middle East and Persian Gulf, with Saudi Arabia topping the list with over $49 billion in new agreements. This is particularly troubling given the complex array of conflicts raging throughout the region, and given the Saudi regime’s use of U.S.-supplied weaponry in its military intervention in Yemen. …

“The Obama administration’s push for more Mideast arms sales has been a bonanza for U.S. weapons contractors, who have made increased exports a primary goal as Pentagon spending levels off. Not only do foreign sales boost company profits, but they also help keep open production lines that would otherwise have to close due to declining orders from the Pentagon. …

“The use of U.S.-supplied helicopters, combat aircraft, bombs, and missiles in Yemen has contributed to the humanitarian catastrophe there. A recent attack on a wedding party that killed more than 130 people is just the latest example of the indiscriminate bombing that has resulted in the majority of the more than 2,300 civilian deaths caused by the war. The bombing has been coupled with a naval blockade that has led to a situation in which four out of five people in Yemen are now in need of humanitarian aid.”

Hollande and Obama: Doubling Down on “Imperialism”?

French president François Hollande will be visiting President Barack Obama at the White House Tuesday. He will visit Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday. For upcoming events, see

Brussels, with 170,000 residents — and seat of the headquarters of NATO and the EU — is under lockdown.

DIANA JOHNSTONE, diana.johnstone at
Johnstone, a Paris-based journalist, recently wrote the piece “Terrorist Attacks in Paris: Can Tragedy Bring Change?” for Counterpunch. Her new book is Queen of Chaos: the Misadventures of Hillary Clinton. She writes: “By stressing that now we are ‘at war,’ President Hollande seemed to be mimicking the U.S. reaction to 9/11. But at war with whom exactly?  France has been a foremost supporter of the ‘Assad must go’ line. Does France need to change wars? Should it, could it, possibly change foreign policies?

“President Obama went on television with statements of solidarity while the attacks were still going on. These statements were naturally played up by media wishing to use these attacks to secure and strengthen current U.S. domination of French foreign policy.

“Israeli condolences were quickly used by the usual commentators to stress that Israel understands us and stands by us, because Israel is a perpetual victim of such terror attacks, these days with ‘knife attacks…’ No, the attacks by desperate Palestinians are not the same as the gratuitous murders in Paris. That claim is familiar: because of 9/11, and now because of November 13, we are all in the same boat with Israel, fighting the same enemy. But which enemy, after all? The enemy of Israel is Hezbollah, which just suffered a devastating attack in Beirut from the same sort of people who massacred Parisians.” [see “Nasrallah’s Speech Right After the Paris Attacks: Condemns ISIS, Embraces Syrian Refugees.” Johnstone previously wrote Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions.

Demba Moussa Dembele is an economist from Senegal and member of African Social Forum. He said today: “Mali is one of the main collateral victims of the destruction of Libya and the assassination of President Gaddafi by NATO imperialist forces, led by the U.S., France and the UK.

“The invasion of Northern Mali was a direct consequence of Libya’s destruction. As the world is witnessing every day, Libya has become a nest of terrorist groups.

“So, what happened in Bamako this Friday, November 20th, is another manifestation of the spread of terrorism to the Sahel region as a result of NATO’s invasion of Libya.

“Therefore, it is fair to say that the U.S., France, the UK and their NATO allies are the main parties responsible for the terrorist attacks in Bamako and in other countries of the Sahel region.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at
Boyle is professor at the University of Illinois College of Law. In his book on Destroying Libya and World Order, Boyle predicted the outcome of the Libya intervention would be a collapsed state and increased jihadi elements in nearby countries including Mali and Algeria. The New York Times reports now: “Mali Hotel Attackers Are Tied to an Algerian Qaeda Leader.”

He said today: “The UN Security Council resolution passed over the weekend was not a Chapter 7 resolution, so legally it doesn’t authorize the use of force, but the U.S. and France will use it to give legal cover for their illegal bombing of Syria, which has gone on for more than a year now. It appears that British Prime Minister Cameron will now be doing the same. The Russian bombing of Syria is technically legal because they have the explicit permission of the Syrian government, but of course Putin will ultimately act in accord with his interests, not what is best for the Syrian people.” Boyle’s other books include Tackling America’s Toughest Questions and Biowarfare and Terrorism.

Mali: Libya Bombing and Saudi Power as Sources of Instability

AJAMU BARAKA, ajamubaraka2 at
Only in the U.S. through next week, Baraka is an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and is based in Colombia.

He said today: “The destabilization of Mali and the enhanced power of jihadist groups in in the country are a direct consequence of the British and French led NATO assault on Libya. Across the North and West Africa, it was the militant jihadist forces who became the real beneficiaries of the Western led destruction of Libya which resulted in arms and reinvigorated radical Islamist movements in a number of countries in Africa. Unfortunately, the innocent are paying the price for the misguided policies of the French government.”

While NPR reports that “France has historic ties with Mali, where gunmen took hostages at a luxury hotel in the capital Bamako.” Baraka highlights the nature of those “historic ties.” Says Baraka: “It is important to understand the nefarious role of the French state in Mali — and indeed across north Africa — as French policies have resulted in increased ability of these reactionary forces to carry out these horrific acts that we are all witness to.

Baraka is also an editor and columnist for Black Agenda Report. He recently wrote the piece “The Paris Attacks and the White Lives Matter Movement” in which he writes of the Paris attacks representing “blowback” from France’s intervention in Syria. Writes Baraka, ”In the context of the existing global power relations, crimes committed by Western states and those states aligned with the West as well as their paramilitary institutions escape accountability for crimes committed in the non-European world. In fact some states — like the United States — proudly claim their ‘exceptionality,’ meaning impunity from international norms, as a self-evident natural right.”

Added Baraka: “There’s also the critical role of the Saudi government and individual citizens regarding the rise and enhancement of power of radical jihadi movements in the Mideast, Africa and indeed, the world.” See his piece on the ongoing Saudi bombing of Yemen in Counterpunch: “The Yemen Tragedy and the Ongoing Crisis of the Left in the United States.”

Baraka warned in the piece “From Benghazi to Boko Haram: Why I support the Benghazi Inquiry” from last year: “African Union Commission chief Jean Ping warned NATO, during its bombing campaign and arming of so-called rebel forces in Libya, that the weapons they provided the ‘rebels’ would end up in the hands of al-Qaeda throughout Africa. He said, ‘Africa’s concern is that weapons that are delivered to one side or another … are already in the desert and will arm terrorists and fuel trafficking.’

“Former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo expressed what many in Africa feared from the NATO attack on Libya: ‘We knew that at the end of the Libya operations, there would be fallouts. And the fallout would be where would all the weapons go? Where would be some of those who have been trained how to use weapons [and] how would they be accounted for? … Part of what is happening in Mali is part of the fallout from Libya, and we should not expect that Mali will be the last.'”

Background: Nick Turse on “Democracy Now” earlier this week: “”Tomorrow’s Battlefield”: As U.S. Special Ops Enter Syria, Growing Presence in Africa Goes Unnoticed” stated: “One example is the case of Mali, where you had a U.S.-trained officer who overthrew the democratically elected government there just two years ago. You know, this was — Mali was supposed to be a bulwark against terrorism. It was supposed to be a stable success story. Instead you have that occurrence. Then, last year, a U.S.-trained officer overthrew the government of Burkina Faso. …

“And it then had a tendency to spread across the continent. Gaddafi had Tuaregs from Mali who worked for him. They were elite troops. As his regime was falling, the Tuaregs raided his weapons stores, and they moved into Mali, into their traditional homeland, to carve out their own nation there. When they did that, the U.S.-backed military in Mali, that we had been training for years, began to disintegrate. That’s when the U.S.-trained officer decided that he could do a better job, overthrew the democratically elected government. But he proved no better at fighting the Tuaregs than the government he overthrew. As a result, Islamist rebels came in and pushed out his forces and the Tuaregs, and were making great gains in the country, looked poised to take it over.”The U.S. decided to intervene again, another military intervention. We backed the French and an African force to go in and stop the Islamists. We were able to, with these proxies — which is the preferred method of warfare on the African continent — arrest the Islamists’ advance, but now Mali has descended into a low-level insurgency. And it’s been like this for several years now. The weapons that the Tuaregs originally had were taken by the Islamists and have now spread across the continent. You can find those weapons in the hands of Boko Haram now, even as far away as Sinai in Egypt. So, now, the U.S. has seen this as a way to stop the spread of militancy, but I think when you look, you see it just has spread it.”

“What I Discovered From Interviewing Imprisoned ISIS Fighters”

LYDIA WILSON, lydia.wilson at, @lsmwilson
Last month, The Nation published Wilson’s article “What I Discovered From Interviewing Imprisoned ISIS Fighters.”

In an interview on “Democracy Now” this week, she described the goals of ISIS: “One is to cause as much terror on the streets as you can, to attack tourist destinations so that security is strengthened in those places, and it costs the unbelieving nations more money. And one is to drag us into a war, to drag our forces into wars that we cannot win, and — as they see it — and also that we will spend an awful lot of our money and power fighting.”

Of the fighters she interviewed, Wilson said they had “very low education rates — one was illiterate entirely — and big families and often unemployed. So, ISIS was not only offering them a chance to fight for their Sunni identity, but they were offering them money. They were being paid to be foot soldiers. And, I mean, one of them was the eldest of 17 siblings. …”

In her article, Wilson writes: “‘The Americans came,’ he said. ‘They took away Saddam, but they also took away our security. I didn’t like Saddam, we were starving then, but at least we didn’t have war. When you came here, the civil war started.’ …

“These boys came of age under the disastrous American occupation after 2003, in the chaotic and violent Arab part of Iraq, ruled by the viciously sectarian Shia government of Nouri al-Maliki. Growing up Sunni Arab was no fun. A later interviewee described his life growing up under American occupation: He couldn’t go out, he didn’t have a life, and he specifically mentioned that he didn’t have girlfriends. An Islamic State fighter’s biggest resentment was the lack of an adolescence. Another of the interviewees was displaced at the critical age of 13, when his family fled to Kirkuk from Diyala province at the height of Iraq’s sectarian civil war.

“They are children of the occupation, many with missing fathers at crucial periods (through jail, death from execution, or fighting in the insurgency), filled with rage against America and their own government. They are not fueled by the idea of an Islamic caliphate without borders; rather, ISIS is the first group since the crushed Al Qaeda to offer these humiliated and enraged young men a way to defend their dignity, family, and tribe. This is not radicalization to the ISIS way of life, but the promise of a way out of their insecure and undignified lives; the promise of living in pride as Iraqi Sunni Arabs, which is not just a religious identity but cultural, tribal, and land-based, too.”

Wilson is a research fellow at the Centre for the Resolution of Intractable Conflict, University of Oxford; a visiting fellow at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at the Graduate Center, City University New York; and a senior research fellow and field director at Artis International. She edits the Cambridge Literary Review.

Drone Whistleblowers: U.S. Assassination Program Ignites Terrorism

The Guardian reports: “Four former U.S. Air Force service members, with more than 20 years of experience between them operating military drones, have written an open letter to Barack Obama warning that the program of targeted killings by unmanned aircraft has become a major driving force for ISIS and other terrorist groups.

“The group of servicemen have issued an impassioned plea to the Obama administration, calling for a rethink of a military tactic that they say has ‘fueled the feelings of hatred that ignited terrorism and groups like Isis, while also serving as a fundamental recruitment tool similar to Guantánamo Bay’. …

“The four are represented legally by Jesselyn Radack, director of national security and human rights at the nonprofit ExposeFacts [a project of the Institute for Public Accuracy]. ‘This is the first time we’ve had so many people speaking out together about the drone program,’ she said, pointing out that the men were fully aware that they faced possible prosecution for speaking out.” See Guardian piece “Obama’s drone war a ‘recruitment tool’ for ISIS, say U.S. Air Force whistleblowers” which includes the letter from the whistleblowers and a clip of the new film, “Drone.”

ANDREW COCKBURN, amcockburn at
Washington editor of Harper’s Magazine, Cockburn is available for a limited number of interviews. He is author of the recently released book Kill Chain: The Rise of the High-Tech Assassins. His recent articles include “Flying Blind” and “How Assassination Sold Drugs and Promoted Terrorism.” See news release: “Killer Drones: Analysis and Protest of the ‘Bureaucracy of Murder’.”

ED KINANE, edkinane at
Kinane is with Upstate Drone Action in Syracuse and has participated in a series of actions outside the Hancock Air Force Base, where killer drones are operated from. Kinane and and other activists served jail time for their actions. He just wrote “Exposing the Killer Drones of Hancock Airbases’s 174th Attack Wing.” His prior pieces include “Exposing Drone Terrorism.”

Kinane is quoted in the recent piece in the Atlantic: “The Drone Economy The unmanned-aircraft industry could help to revive a struggling region. But what are the consequences?

Causes of Terror: Examining Saudi and U.S. Policies

BBC reports: “U.S. State Department approves Saudi Arabia arms sale.” See: “Despite Atrocities, U.S. Approves $1.29 Billion Deal to Re-Arm Saudi Arabia.”

BEAU GROSSCUP, bgrosscup at
Grosscup is author of several books on terrorism including The Newest Explosions of Terrorism and, most recently, Strategic Terror: The Politics and Ethics of Aerial Bombardment.

He stressed two points:

“1. Who is funding ISIS: Saudis and other Sunni Gulf states — most of whom, Turkey included, are, other than Israel of course, the U.S. government’s best friends in the Middle East.

“2. The regime change demand for Syria is the same Neocon non-negotiable demand that got us in this place in Iraq and Libya.

“Thus,” he added, the “best strategy — assuming U.S. wants to diminish the radical (Whabbi) Sunni threat — is to push hard on the Saudis; especially, to stop backing their Yemen War. Of course this could mean threatening a longstanding relationship. But U.S. needs to ask: What price peace?

“In Syria, U.S. and its allies should stop trying to dictate who rules Syria. The U.S. government has historically worked with the Assad family (same as with Gaddafi in Libya) — why all of a sudden did he have to go? ISIS can only be diminished if they are met with a united front in Syria and Iraq politically as local and international political unity is central to military unity.

“Finally, U.S. citizens need to recognize how much the allegedly discredited Neocon strategy of divide and conquer and regime change that dominated Bush/Cheney continue to guide the Obama Administration and are likely to guide the next administration whether GOP or Democrat, especially if current front-runners hold. It is important to stop the failed Neocon stranglehold on U.S. (indeed Western) policy.”

See: “Barbara Lee Interestingly Declines to Address U.S. Arms to Saudi Arabia.”

Next Page »