President inquires into drug destroying mechanism

 

2017-08-03

The detection of hauls of drugs, from time, has raised many an eyebrow in the society. Recently there was the discovery of a haul of cocaine in a sugar container bound for Lanka Sathosa, a state owned retail chain. The sugar import had originated from Brazil.

Once the legal process that entails such detections concludes, it’s questionable whether the discovered hauls of drugs, be it Cocaine, Opium or Heroin, is destroyed properly without any of it reaching traffickers through the backdoor?

President Maithripala Sirisena was anxious to know about this at Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting. He asked about the final outcome regarding such hauls of drugs recovered from time to time. According to sources close to the Cabinet, the President was curious to know about this as there is public perception that such drugs finally reach undesirable hands in society, someway or another.

After making his remarks regarding the matter, the President inquired about the kind of mechanism used currently to destroy Heroin or Cocaine once detected and dispensed following a court case. He made his inquiries from Law and Order Minister Sagala Ratnayake.

Ratnayake said the Police, on every occasion, destroyed such hauls after the court process concluded. However, it was found that there was lacuna monitoring in this case. He immediately instructed Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, Health Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne and Science and Technology Minister Susil Premajayantha to work out a piece of legislation outlining modalities for the destruction of hauls of drugs after discovery.

The Cabinet has taken up this matter because the international media has projected Sri Lanka as a transit hub of a drug trafficking mafia.  

It got credence after the detection of 150 kilos of Cocaine in a sugar container imported for Lanka Sathosa recently.  

It’s an import of sugar made through the government’s tender procedure. Therefore, a series of questions have been raised as to how Cocaine was concealed inside the container to be smuggled into the country? Even some government MPs have sought a proper investigation into the matter  
Sports Minister Dayasiri Jayasekara, who commented on the drug peddling at the Cabinet meeting, said that there was public perception that such discovered drugs were released to be peddled locally by some unscrupulous elements. As a result, he said it was vital to work out a legal mechanism stipulating criteria for destroying them.  

“Otherwise, people believe that they reach local drug cartels,” he said.

The President was also under the impression that such drugs- Opium, Cocaine and Heroin- were released to racketeers through the backdoor.  
Minister Rajapakshe told Daily Mirror that he would call for a workshop with the relevant officials and the law enforcement authorities to work out a system to destroy such items.

“There is a system now in place. But, it’s not adequate enough to deal with the current complications,” he said.  

One week for Cabinet Ministers to study Hambantota Port Deal

Apart from this aspect, the Cabinet took up for discussion the agreement signed with China Merchants Ports Holding Company to lease out a stake of the Hambantota Port for development. Ports and Shipping Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe presented it and asked his colleagues to study it in deep.

They were given one whole week for the purpose.  

He said it was still open for amendments. The government views the whole transaction as a lucrative investment. It’s expected to get US 1.4 billion for the stake leased out to the Chinese company. So, the government is planning to replenish its foreign reserves, otherwise on a downward spiral.
 
JO consults legal experts on Port Deal 

However, the Joint Opposition, led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, is opposed to the agreement. His brother former Economic Development Minister Basil Rajapaksa vowed to scrap the agreement if his side assumed power in the future.

Already, the Joint Opposition has assigned a committee of legal luminaries headed by former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva to study the provisions of the agreement in reference to the international law. The Joint Opposition is planning to get the agreement annulled through a judicial process.

Ravi’s fate depends on his response to allegations against him

Revelations made before the Presidential Commission Investigation Bond against Foreign Affairs Minister Ravi Karunanayake has created an uproar even within the United National Party (UNP) which he represents as its strongman.  

It was revealed that Arjun Aloysius, who ran Perpetual Treasuries which is a Primary Dealer in bond transactions, paid the Penthouse rent for Minister Karunanayake.  
The revelation made a moral affront to the unity government which gained power on the platform to weed out corruption and irregularities in all their manifestations.  

Against the backdrop, it’s learned that a team of UNP MPs made representations to party leader Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and asked him to initiate action against Karunanayake.

However, the Prime Minister is reported to have asked these MPs to wait till Karunanayake responds to the allegations against him.  

The Minister was to appear before the Commission yesterday. Whether he will face the axe or not, will depend on how convincingly he responds to the allegations during cross examination. These UNP MPs believe that Karunanayake should resign from his post.  

President attempts to discourage SLFPers from leaving Govt 

Amidst plans by some MPs of Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) to quit the government next month, President Maithripala Sirisena has started laying stress on the fact that a new government can’t be formed without his blessing. Also, he said a new government couldn’t be formed until after the parliamentary election in 2020.  

However, the SLFP section has given serious thought to part ways with the government after September. Most of these MPs, holding posts in the government as Cabinet, State and Deputy Ministers, have communicated their intention to their constituents.

The President and his close confidantes like Minister Mahinda Amaraweera, Duminda Dissanayake, Gamini Vijith Wijeyamuni Zoysa and S. B. Dissanayake, want to continue with the concept of national unity government further. It sounds like the UNP is also for it.  

The President’s remarks might have been intended to discourage any defection from the government.
Some SLFPers determined to leave

However, the SLFPers, wanting to leave, say that they are under incessant pressure from their constituents to break ranks with the government. The exact number, planning to leave, is not yet known. Be that as it may, some among them will leave for sure.

They won’t join the Joint Opposition straightway. Instead, they will sit in the opposition as a different group. Finally, they will join hands with the Joint Opposition.

Meanwhile, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the main opposition,  fears whether any such defection will derail the constitution making process. Opposition Leader R. Sampanthan has stressed this point in public.  

A defection can deny the two-thirds support for the government in Parliament. In such an eventuality, any constitutional amendment is impossible and as such the TNA’s fear is reasonable. 

Polythene and plastics: The guilt is ours!

Thursday, 3 August 2017

The Government of Sri Lanka has declared a ban and restrictions on the use of plastic bags and lunch sheets, etc. The new regulations are to come into effect from 1 September 2017.  The lunch sheet and the bag have been around for a long time and have been subjected to serious scrutiny and perhaps Meethotamulla triggered the final showdown.

Polythene and plastics The guilt is ours!.docx by Thavam on Scribd

Priority bus lanes in force in Colombo from August 15

Aug 03, 2017

Priority bus lanes will be in force in Colombo and its suburbs from August 15, officials from the Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development and the Police Traffic Division confirmed Today.

Officials said the programme will initially be implemented for traffic coming into Colombo along the Galle Road with other major roads and outbound traffic roped into equation in the coming months. If followed successfully the programme is set to reduce traffic congestion by at least 50 percent and allow a faster traffic flow within the city.

Transport Development Deputy Project Director from the Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development, P. Dissanayke said all bus routes in the city will be brought under the programme as and when infrastructure is available to do so.

“We need at least three lanes in the road to establish such a programme. The issue now is that we don’t have the necessary infrastructure. We will start with Galle Road and establish the programme in other areas when possible,” he said.

Under the first phase of the programme, lanes will be allocated for buses along Galle Road, from Moratuwa to Pettah, and the route from Diyatha Uyana to Pettah.

A monitoring centre will be set up by the Ministry which will have access to CCTV cameras set up along the bus route. Buses will also be fixed with GPS trackers to ensure they do not travel outside the allocated lane.

“The monitoring centre will be manned throughout the day and police officers will be present at the scene to direct officers in the field in case bus drivers do not travel along the allocated lane,” Dissanayake said.

As the pilot project was already held, once initiated on August 15, the programme will function as part of traffic regulations and bus drivers will be liable to fines if they were to drive out of line.

“We will deal with inbound traffic this year and out bound traffic next year. We have chosen Galle Road and road leading from Diyatha Uyana for the initial phase of the project. Under the second phase we will concentrate on Havelock Road,” he said.

Officials conducted the pilot project for the programme from Rajagiriya Junction to Ayurveda Junction earlier this year.

Meanwhile, speaking to the Daily Mirror Director of Police Traffic Division in Colombo, SP Sumith Nissanka said the Police would provide their service to conduct this project as they did earlier when initiating it in Rajagiriya.

- http://www.dailymirror.lk -

Surge in Israeli attacks on journalists

Occupation forces barred journalists from entering Jerusalem’s Old City during two weeks of Palestinian civil disobedience and protests against tightened Israeli control.

ActiveStills

Charlotte Silver-2 August 2017

During the two weeks of sustained Palestinian protests in occupied East Jerusalem over Israel’s attempts to tighten control over the al-Aqsa mosque compound, press groups monitored a surge in violations against journalists.

The Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Development and Media Freedoms (MADA) recorded dozens of violations committed by Israeli occupation forces, who reportedly attacked, arrested and threatened journalists covering Palestinian protests in the city.

Israeli police barred journalists from entering the Old City of Jerusalem, while Israeli settlers and tourists entered freely.

Overall during the al-Aqsa-related protests, six Palestinians were killed and more than 1,000 injured by Israeli forces, who were recorded carrying out unprovoked attacks on peaceful gatherings.

This week, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and an Israeli press union filed petitions against the Israeli police, demanding they cease restricting and hindering press coverage in the Old City.

“The fact that tourists and Israeli Jews freely entered the Old City while journalists were barred from doing so raises concern that the police’s intention was to prevent the free flow of information through the media on the events taking place and on the police’s handling of those events,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a press release.

Oren Ziv, a photographer with the collective ActiveStills, told The Electronic Intifada that Israeli soldiers and police regularly attack Palestinian and other journalists who cover smaller Palestinian demonstrations, but the events in Jerusalem were unusual because of the wide attention they received.

During the protests, Israeli police were filmed violently assaulting Ziv’s ActiveStills colleague Faiz Abu Rmeleh.

“Palestinian journalists are always attacked at local protests, but in this case, this policy was affecting mainstream Israeli and international media too,” Ziv said.

“They don’t respect any freedom of the press in the liberal sense,” Ziv added.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel noted that several journalists had been wounded by weapons used by Israeli forces, including a sponge-tipped bullet and a stun grenade. Other journalists have reported being beaten up or forced to turn over footage.

Camera operators for international outlets including Sky News, Reuters, Al Jazeera and RT were among the journalists who were attacked, according to MADA.

Ziv says he welcomes the solidarity from more mainstream Israeli journalists and looks forward to seeing how the police respond to the petitions in Israel’s high court.

Attacks continue

Even now that the protests in Jerusalem have subsided, following Israel’s decision to heed the protesters’ demands and remove metal detectors and surveillance equipment at the gates of the al-Aqsa complex, attacks on the press have continued.

On 29 July, three days after Israel removed the last of the installations, Israeli soldiers carried out dawn raids of several media organizations housed in the Ramallah offices of PalMedia.

Al-Quds TV and Lebanese broadcasters Al-Mayadeen and Al-Manar, as well as RT, were all raided by soldiers on the allegation that they were engaging in “incitement.”

The Israeli army seized documents and equipment, according to Ma’an News Agency.

The Committee to Protect Journalists condemned the raid.

“Israeli soldiers cannot simply allege incitement and raid broadcasters’ offices,” the group’s Middle East and North Africa coordinator Sherif Mansour said in a press release. “We call on the Israeli military to return all equipment it seized from PalMedia’s office in Ramallah immediately and stop harassing the press.”

Israel has a long record of jailing journalists and raiding media offices on the pretext of “incitement.”

Kicking out Al Jazeera

Meanwhile, Israel’s communications minister, Ayoub Kara, announced on Monday that his department is discussing a bill to close Al Jazeera’s offices in Jerusalem.

Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to close Al Jazeera’s bureau, asserting its journalists “incite violence.”

The Qatar-based media network denounced Netanyahu’s claim, vowing that “it would take all necessary legal measures in case they act on their threat.”

Netanyahu’s statement came as a group of Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, have been pressuring Qatar to shut down Al Jazeera entirely.

Kara acknowledged that the Israeli government’s move was connected to the desires of Gulf states – with which Israel is increasingly allied – to see Al Jazeera shuttered.

“We identify with the moderates in the Arab World who are fighting terrorism and religious extremism,” Kara told The Jerusalem Post. “Here in Israel, there is no place for a channel that backs terrorism either. We will act like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain and more, which expelled the inciting channel from their countries.”

Reporters Sans Frontiers ranks Saudi Arabia at 168 out of 180 countries for press freedom in 2017; Bahrain ranks 164, Egypt ranks 161 and Jordan ranks 138.

Israel ranks 91.

The Smart Way to End ‘Pay to Slay’

Washington wants to stop the Palestinian Authority from incentivizing violence. But if it's not careful, it could push the region further into chaos.

BY DAVID MAKOVSKY, DENNIS ROSS, LIA WEINER-AUGUST 2, 2017

Congress is finally considering legislation to stop the Palestinian Authority from incentivizing violence. The PA has long provided families of Palestinians who carried out attacks against Israelis with financial rewards tied to the amount of time they serve in Israeli jail, as well as to those whose relatives died while engaging in violence against innocents. The PA has largely justified this practice by claiming that if it doesn’t provide these benefits, Hamas will. This is a losing argument; while the PA certainly does compete for political influence with Hamas, it cannot gain an advantage over its Islamist rival by adopting its policy of justifying violence.

This has to stop, and the Taylor Force Act, named after an exemplary West Point graduate and veteran who was killed in a terrorist attack in Israel last year, attempts to do that. As it currently stands, the act would cut U.S. foreign assistance to the West Bank and Gaza in its entirety if the “payments for acts of terrorism against United States and Israeli citizens to any individual who has been imprisoned after being fairly tried and convicted for such acts of terrorism, including to a family member of such individuals” do not stop. The legislation before the Senate is currently in the drafting phase, and a markup of the bill is scheduled for later this week in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

If passed, the legislation will send an unambiguous message to the PA that its practice of providing benefits to those who carry out acts of violence against Israelis or Americans is abhorrent and unacceptable. Israeli officials who have interrogated Palestinian perpetrators of violence find many who say they carried out attacks because they know their families will be rewarded. For this reason, the Israeli government has expressed general support for the bill, though a senior advisor said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not offer views about the specific provisions in order not to interfere with the American legislative process.

But being right about an issue is not the same as being smart about it. The United States wants the PA to stop legitimizing terror by rewarding violence, but it needs to act in a way that does not make the situation between Israelis and Palestinians even worse. Threats of sweeping cuts to Palestinian aid may hurt the cause more than they help.

The worst-case scenario is that the PA feels compelled by the legislation to prove that it is not bowing to external pressure

The worst-case scenario is that the PA feels compelled by the legislation to prove that it is not bowing to external pressure, and thus severs a project Washington strongly favors: security cooperation with the Israelis. Such a development would risk igniting the already tense situation in the West Bank and Jerusalem, further endangering the lives of Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans.

The PA and Israeli security services have long cooperated, for good reason, to keep Hamas and jihadi groups out of the West Bank. At the annual Herzliya Conference on security and foreign policy in June, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot publicly declared “the Palestinian security apparatus’ conduct is worthy of notice and admiration, reflecting their understanding of our mutual interests.” Eisenkot’s public comment was echoed time and again during our conversations with Israeli military officials in a recent trip to Israel, who very much want the security cooperation to continue.

In terms of cutting U.S. assistance, these officials were very careful not to appear to be weighing in on a political issue. That said, while they would like to see a tough message sent to the PA about the consequences of incentivizing violence, they also want to prevent any deterioration in the quality of life for Palestinians lest that lead to greater radicalization. The IDF has quietly pushed back at politicians who, at times, have favored collective punishment to deal with lone perpetrators of violence — arguing that making life difficult for all Palestinians is the surest way to ignite a much wider uprising.

To entirely defund U.S. aid to the West Bank and Gaza is thus to halt economic and social progress there that Israeli military officials see as in the mutual interest of Israelis and Palestinians. President Donald Trump’s administration has also favored an economic development agenda for Palestinians in the West Bank and this is bound to be impacted if all U.S. funding is discontinued.

So, the place to start in developing an effective U.S. policy is understanding how assistance to the Palestinian Authority is structured and where Washington’s levers of influence lie. After President Mahmoud Abbas forced the departure of PA premier Salam Fayyad in 2014, aid was slashed significantly; the United States cut approximately $200 million in budgetary support. It also ceased to transfer money into the PA’s account, transferring funds instead by direct payments to American-backed creditors. The current U.S. funding level of the PA is $260 million per year.

This money can be divided into three baskets. The first basket, consisting of roughly $70 million, goes to electricity costs in the West Bank and medical treatment. Approximately $25 million of this basket serves to reimburse hospitals for medical care of Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Witnesses at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s recent Taylor Force Act hearing gave testimonies reflecting bipartisan agreement that the payments to hospitals are an essential form of humanitarian aid that must be maintained.

The remaining $45 million of this basket is paid directly to Israeli electricity companies to settle the PA’s electricity debts for services to PA buildings and debts accrued by Palestinians. If the United States cuts this aid, the PA will be forced to reallocate funds from its budget to meet the debt payments. In other words, this is the only portion of U.S. aid to the West Bank and Gaza that is fungible; cutting this money would force the PA to adjust its budget that includes the payments to prisoners and the families of “martyrs.”

The second basket of $85 million consists of U.S. aid that is tangentially related to the PA. Most of these projects pertain to roads, water desalination, education, and good governance. In all likelihood, these projects will be abandoned if the U.S. pulls funding. Roads will be left unfinished and less clean water will be available, increasing the likelihood of another confrontation between Israelis and Palestinians. Good governance projects that work to foster the legal frameworks, transparent procedures, and private-sector participation that can enable economic reform will be similarly abandoned — and their consequences will be felt over time.

A third basket, made up of the remaining $106 million, goes directly to projects that are completely independent of the PA. These include various educational initiatives and private sector development. One of the notable projects in this basket is headed by the U.S.-based Mercy Corps, which aims to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Gazans by improving economic growth, education, and health in the Gaza Strip. It is safe to say that if the United States chooses to defund these projects, the PA will not step in to resuscitate them. The projects will simply cease to exist — at a time when the humanitarian conditions in Gaza are already near collapse, with only three hours of electricity a day.

There is actually a fourth basket, which comes out of a different set of funds. This is support for U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Frederick Rudesheim, the security coordinator who has skillfully succeeded in working with both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian security system to facilitate close security cooperation. This portion of U.S. funding is not being considered for cuts under the Taylor Force Act. However, if the economic assistance is zeroed out, the security cooperation — which is very unpopular among Palestinians — may not be politically sustainable.

Rather than placing the bulk of U.S. aid on the chopping block, legislation must be crafted to incentivize the PA to reform its behavior

Rather than placing the bulk of U.S. aid on the chopping block, legislation must be crafted to incentivize the PA to reform its behavior — not further downgrade its ties with the United States and Israel. This seems to be the sentiment of senior members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, conveyed in the recent hearing that he strongly supports the principles underlying the Taylor Force Act, but questioned its unintended consequences. Similarly, Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the committee chairman, commented, “I think there is probably a more targeted way of dealing with that issue.”

Sen. Corker may be onto something. The PA has ways of supporting those who are in need without providing rewards and outsized financial benefits to the families of terrorists. For instance, it has a welfare bureau to support families who have lost their breadwinners. There is a big difference between providing comparable payments to those in need and giving preferential treatment and substantially greater money to the families of those who commit acts of terrorism. Israeli security officials have privately maintained that this would be the best practice to balance the need to support the families, while avoiding any incentivization of violence.

In attempting to bring this pernicious PA policy to a halt, members of Congress who are formulating the Taylor Force Act should proceed carefully. There should definitely be no “pay to slay,” but the approach needs to recognize that shades of gray enter into dealing with an issue like this. Being smart counts for more than being right. And, the smart approach is one that also recognizes that innocent Palestinians, who have not been able to vote in an election for more than a decade, should not be forced to pay for the mistakes of a government they cannot control.

ABBAS MOMANI/AFP/Getty Images

A timeline of the explosive lawsuit alleging a White House link in the Seth Rich conspiracy

 The Post's Keith L. Alexander shares what the D.C. police investigation has found into the murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich. (Claritza Jimenez/The Washington Post)

By Philip Bump August 1 at 5:29 PM

NPR’s David Folkenflik reported Tuesday morning on a lawsuit filed by a man named Rod Wheeler that makes a remarkable claim: The Trump White House — or President Trump personally — may have been aware of or involved in a discredited Fox News story about the killing of a Democratic National Committee staffer last July.

It’s a complicated story that, we hasten to add, is based on allegations in a lawsuit filed by a person whose quotes in that discredited story were themselves discredited. But the lawsuit includes documentary evidence (like text messages), and Folkenflik was given access to recorded calls that bolster the story as presented. What’s more, the lawsuit is predicated on Wheeler’s assertion that he never said the quotes attributed to him.

Given the complexity of the story, we’ve taken the details in the lawsuit and arranged them as a timeline. First, though, it’s important to understand the cast of characters.

Rod Wheeler. Wheeler is a former D.C. homicide detective who now does private investigation work. Wheeler has been contributing to Fox News for more than a decade, even through this weekend. It’s Wheeler who’s filed the lawsuit, as will be explained below.

Ed Butowsky. A wealthy businessman who strongly supported the candidacy of Donald Trump and makes frequent appearances on the Fox Business network. BuzzFeed profiled him earlier this year.
Malia Zimmerman. A reporter for Fox News.

Seth Rich. A former Democratic National Committee staffer who was killed last year. This is where the timeline begins.

---

July 10, 2016

Rich is shot to death in Washington during what D.C. police describe as an attempted armed robbery. The case remains unsolved.
July 22, 2016

WikiLeaks releases a batch of emails stolen from the DNC. That Rich was killed shortly before these files were released eventually spawns conspiracy theories about the possibility that Rich may have been involved in a plot to release them that ended in his murder.

U.S. intelligence agencies dismiss that idea. Their evidence suggests that the DNC network was accessed over a long period of time by two different Russian government agencies, as early as the summer of 2015.

Jan. 20, 2017

Trump is inaugurated as president.

February

Butowsky reaches out to Rich’s family to offer to help fund an investigation into their son’s death. They agree.

At some point before or during February, Butowsky apparently speaks with veteran journalist Seymour Hersh, who Butowsky says indicated a link between Rich and the FBI. Hersh told Folkenflik it was “gossip” and that Butowsky “took two and two and made forty-five out of it.”
Feb. 23

Butowsky allegedly texts Wheeler to pitch him on pursuing the Rich investigation. That text:

The two speak on the phone.

Feb. 28

Butowsky, Zimmerman and Wheeler meet for the first time. Wheelerindicates that he’s surprised Zimmerman is at the meeting.

Butowsky later introduces Wheeler to the Rich family but allegedly asks that he not mention the link to Fox News.

March 14

The Rich family retains Wheeler to investigate the killing, paid for by Butowsky.

April 18

According to the lawsuit, Butowsky allegedly texts Wheeler to ask him to join a meeting with White House press secretary Sean Spicer.

The lawsuit alleges that Butowsky explained the reason for the meeting as to “keep [Spicer] abreast” of the investigation.

April 20

Butowsky and Wheeler meet with Spicer. Wheeler’s lawsuit claims that Spicer was given a copy of the outline of Wheeler’s investigation and asked to be kept updated about it.

Spicer later acknowledged the meeting to NPR’s Folkenflik.

“It had nothing to do with advancing the president’s domestic agenda — and there was no agenda,” Spicer told Folkenflik. “They were just informing me of the [Fox] story.”

April 25

Wheeler meets with a D.C. detective investigating Rich’s murder, who indicates that he has no evidence that the killing was anything other than a robbery. Butowsky allegedly sends an email to Wheeler saying that if the detective doesn’t help, “we will go after him as being part of the coverup.”

May 9

Trump fires FBI Director James B. Comey.

May 10

Butowsky and Zimmerman allegedly call Wheeler and inform him that they’ve identified an FBI source who can confirm emails between Rich and WikiLeaks.

May 11

Zimmerman shares a draft of her story with Wheeler. It doesn’t include quotes from Wheeler about that FBI link.

May 14

Wheeler claims that Butowsky had repeatedly made remarks about how the White House was paying attention to the story. On May 14, Butowsky calls Wheeler and leaves a message that Wheeler shared with Folkenflik.

“A couple of minutes ago,” Butowsky says, “I got a note that we have the full attention of the White House on this and tomorrow let’s close this deal.”

He then texts Wheeler to inform him that Trump read Zimmerman’s article and wants it published.

To NPR, both Spicer and Butowsky deny that the president reviewed the story. Butowsky told Folkenflik he was “joking with a friend.”

May 15

The Washington Post, continuing a second week of scoops about the Trump administration, reports that Trump revealed classified information in a private May 10 meeting with the Russian foreign minister.

Zimmerman informs Wheeler that her story is going to be posted shortly. She asks Wheeler for quotes on specific topics, neither of which relates to the alleged source at the FBI.

With the story set to publish, Butowsky allegedly emails Wheeler and the hosts and producers of Fox News’ “Fox and Friends.” He reinforces a key point of what he hopes to accomplish: Undercut the idea that Trump’s election was aided by Russian interference. (Emphasis is from the lawsuit.)

Zimmerman’s story is posted on a local news station in D.C.

May 16

The story goes up on Fox News’ website. It includes quotes from Wheelerabout the FBI source that he claims in the lawsuit he never gave to Zimmerman.

In a recording of a three-way call that day with Butowsky and Zimmermanprovided to Folkenflik, she seems to acknowledge that.

“Not the part about, I mean, the connection to WikiLeaks, but the rest of the quotes in the story did” come from Wheeler, she says. Butowsky tells Wheeler, “One day you’re going to win an award for having said those things you didn’t say.”

Zimmerman says that her superiors at Fox News told her to keep the quotes. Wheeler had first called Butowsky to complain. Butowsky allegedly pointed the finger at the White House.

These quotes that Wheeler says were fabricated by Zimmerman are the heart of his lawsuit.
Spicer is asked about the story during the White House press briefing. He claims not to be aware of the story.

Q:    Sean, can we get a White House reaction or the President’s reaction to the report that said Rich was emailing WikiLeaks before his murder?
MR. SPICER:  I don’t — I’m not aware of — generally, I don’t get updates on DNC — former DNC staffers.  I’m not aware of that.

That night, Wheeler appears on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program and supports the story, though he claims not to have personal knowledge of a Rich-WikiLeaks link.

May 17

The local D.C. station reports that Wheeler was backtracking on the statements attributed to him — including statements made on-air.

FOX 5 DC: “You have sources at the FBI saying that there is information…”
WHEELER: “For sure…”
FOX 5 DC: “…that could link Seth Rich to WikiLeaks?”
WHEELER: “Absolutely. Yeah. That’s confirmed.”

May 23

Fox News retracts its story.

Update: At Tuesday’s daily press briefing, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders addressed the allegation. “The president had no knowledge of the story,” Sanders said, “and it’s completely untrue that he or the White House [were involved] in the story.”

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Aug. 1 said the White House was not involved in a discredited Fox News story about former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, who was killed last year. (Reuters)

Fox News also released a statement later Tuesday, denying allegations in the lawsuit: “The accusation that FoxNews.com published Malia Zimmerman’s story to help detract from coverage of the Russia collusion issue is completely erroneous. The retraction of this story is still being investigated internally and we have no evidence that Rod Wheeler was misquoted by Zimmerman.”

'It's memorycide': Turkey dismantles monuments to Kurdish culture

Locals in Diyarbakir say Turkey is trying to wipe out Kurdish heritage in its south-east, and with it political aspirations

Turkish police officers stand guard in front of court house in Diyarbakir, southeastern Turkey, on 30 October 2016 (AFP)

Tom Stevenson-Thursday 3 August 2017

DIYARBAKIR – Just a few short months ago, visitors approaching Diyarbakir city hall were greeted by a large, black stone statue of a Lammasu – an ancient Assyrian deity with the head of a man, the body of an ox, and the wings of a bird. Now the building is protected by very different guardians: police officers pointing assault rifles out from behind armoured metal outposts.

Turkish officials have been systematically removing Kurdish public monuments and memorials across the country's majority-Kurdish south-east. The city hall's Lammasu is just one of the victims of the statue purge.

It was very powerful when people were able to see figures in public spaces which depicted something other than Ataturk

- Serif Derince, former adviser to the mayor of Diyarbakir

Over the past year the Turkish government has carried out an extensive crackdown on Kurdish political parties after the breakdown of a ceasefire between the banned Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and the Turkish state in 2015 led to brutal street battles in Diyarbakir and other regional cities.

Now that the fighting has largely subsided, the authorities appear to have turned their attention to monuments and expressions of minority culture built by the Kurdish movement.

The list of monuments removed or destroyed includes a mural to a dead Kurdish politician, stone reliefs depicting scenes from the historic Kurdish Marwanid kingdom, and plaques bearing the names of Kurdish children who were shot by security forces during the conflict. 

Workers remove Kurdish language signage from Diyarbakir city hall (Hatice Kamer/MEE)

When a statue celebrating the 17th-century Kurdish writer Ahmedi Khani was destroyed in the city of Dogubeyazıt the state administrator claimed the destruction took place during road maintenance works.

The state administrators, known as Kayyumlar, who have led the removals, were appointed by the Turkish interior ministry to run city governments in place of locally elected mayors who were arrested in the crackdowns.

In the last 18 months, more than 80 co-mayors of local municipalities have been arrested on charges (which rights groups claim are trumped up) of supporting the banned PKK.

The Roboski monument before its removal (Hatice Kamer/MEE)

"The public monuments erected by the Kurdish city councils were an important part of a wider attempt to counter the Turkish state's homogenisation of public spaces and were symbols of the multicultural history of the city," said Serif Derince, a former adviser to the mayor of Diyarbakir and head of the city's cultural programmes. He was fired by the new administrator after the arrest of his former bosses, co-mayors Gultan Kisanak and Firat Anli.

Derince points out that in Diyarbakir's central Sheikh Said square there is a statue of Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, but no monument to the eponymous Sheikh Said, a Kurdish religious leader who was hanged in the square after leading a rebellion against the central government in 1925.

"It was very powerful when people were able to see figures in public spaces which depicted something other than Ataturk," he told Middle East Eye.

Walking in central Diyarbakir, it doesn't take long to find evidence of the administrators' new policies. The shattered remains of a stone monument that stood to commemorate the death of Ugur Kaymaz, a 12-year-old Kurdish boy shot dead by Turkish soldiers in the town of Kiziltepe in 2004, his body carrying 13 bullet wounds, can still be seen around the stone base that once supported it.

"That monument in particular was important," said Derince.

"Kaymaz was killed only because he was a Kurd – there have been hundreds of such cases and the monument marked that history."

The site of the Roboski monument in Kayapinar park, Diyarbakir, after its removal (Murat Bayram/MEE)

In the city's nearby Kayapınar district, an empty patch of brown land in an otherwise green municipal park tells a similar story. Until recently the patch was the site of a large monument erected by the city to commemorate the killing of 34 Kurdish villagers in a Turkish army air strike in 2011. No trace of the monument remains.

The office of the municipality's state administrator did not respond to requests for comment on the removal of the monuments.

"Diyarbakir was once known as a multicultural, multinational entrepot, home to Kurds, Turks, Armenians, Assyrians, Yezidis, and Roma," said Adnan Celik, an anthropologist specialising in Kurdish studies at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris.

Read more ►

'Who can do that?' Kurds forced out as Turkish city bulldozed

"When local Kurdish parties got elected they put programmes in place to celebrate that multiculturalism and mark their history," he said.

"In knocking those markers down, the state is trying to destroy not only monuments but the memory of that spirit and ultimately the consciousness built by the Kurdish movement."

One of the first steps the administrators took was to remove Kurdish-language names on public signs across the south-eastern provinces. In Diyarbakir, the Kurdish and Assyrian name for the city, Amed, was removed from the city hall building and replaced with a large image of the Turkish flag.

"It is not only an attack on the Kurdish movement, it's an attack on its political project, including its emphasis on a multicultural and multi-ethnic identity which the Turkish state unfortunately finds threatening," said Celik.

"This is a destruction not only of the physical city, as happened during the crackdown, but also public memory: it is a kind of memorycide."

Of Locking and Unlocking India-China Stand-Off

by Ashok K Mehta- Aug 2, 2017

( August 2, 2017, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) By encroaching upon Bhutanese territory, the PLA was the first one to tie the knot. If argued with Chinese characteristics, it must be the first to untie. This can lead to a sequenced or simultaneous withdrawal

Last Friday, senior Colonel Zhou Bo and this writer were together on the China Global Television Network (CGTN) (CCTV-NEWS) The Point programme titled ‘Doklam and India-China relations’. It was competently and impartially anchored by the vastly experienced Geneva-returned Liu Xin. Some of our nationalistic anchors and their sidekicks, who commandeer the debate, could learn a lesson from the cool and relaxed Bo-Xin duo. Bo’s central point was: How did India have the ‘courage’ to enter Chinese/Bhutanese territory, emphasising that “you had no right to do that…you were not invited by Bhutan”. This is the familiar party line. He referred to the India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty of 2007, stressing that it gave “you no right to jump in when we (China and Bhutan) are having talks’”. This discussion took place while National Security Advisor Ajit Doval was in Beijing, trying to defuse the stand-off.

It is clear that despite Royal Government of Bhutan’s (RGB) demarche of June 20, and a Press release of June 29, read together with the Indian External Affairs Ministry’s (MEA) Press release of June30, and linked with External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s statement in Parliament on July 20, no reference is made about RGB or the Royal Bhutan Army requisitioning help of Indian personnel to stop the People’s Liberation Army from its road construction work. Instead, the July 30 Press release stated “in coordination with RGB, Indian personnel, who were present at Doklam, urged the PLA construction party to desist from changing status quo.’ The MEA spokesperson ducked a question on this from a reporter as it is not relevant in the current context.

Bo’s objection was to India meddling in China-Bhutan relations. Neither the Indian nor the Bhutanese Press release mentions the India-Bhutan treaty. This has allowed multiple Chinese interpretations of the alleged Indian troops overreach. Article 2 of the revised India-Bhutan Treaty 2007 states that both countries shall cooperate closely with each other on issues of national security and interest. Neither Government shall allow use of its territory for activities harmful to the other. The operative part is ‘use of territory harmful to national security’.

What is not incorporated in the Treaty is a Memorandum of Understanding dating back to the 1950s that India will be responsible for the defence of Bhutan. After the 1962 war against China, in a revamp of its overall defence preparedness, an Indian military training team was deployed in Haa valley, Bhutan, with joint Indian-Bhutanese check posts located near the Bhutan-Tibet border like it was done in Nepal. While in Nepal the training support missions and JCPs were wound down, in Bhutan, the training team was enlarged under a two-star General with direct access to the King. In addition, formations of the Eastern Army Command at Kolkata were earmarked for the defence of Bhutan and Special Forces stationed at Thimpu for the protection of the King. Battalions of the Army and Squadrons of Eastern Air Command at Shillong have trained regularly in the campaign season to deter and destroy Chinese ground offensive in west Bhutan. The primary restriction by RGB was that Indian troops keep a low profile. Then, as now, the presence of Indian troops is a sensitive political issue but it worked well till the King reigned and ruled.

In post-democratic Bhutan, some wrinkles may have appeared in this arrangement, which require to be straightened out. Not just the visibility of Indian soldiers, other political irritants have delayed the passage of the Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal regional connectivity network.

In a country of less than 800,000 people, with the majority living outside Thimpu, there is substantial goodwill for India though pockets of resentment exist. Bhutanese have not forgotten that India turned a Nelson’s eye when RGB systematically expelled 100,000 Bhupalese (Bhutanese of Nepalese origin) in September 1990 to avoid Sikkimisation and maintaining Drukpa majority. According to a 1981 census, 53 per cent of the population was Nepali and Drukpas in minority. All this happened after the movement for democracy had taken root in south Bhutan, inspired by easterly winds from Nepal for democratisation.

The ethnic cleansing is perhaps forgotten but scars remain as Nepalese had turned against Nepalese. On a happier note, RGB cooperated enthusiastically to dismantle sanctuaries of Bodo, United Liberation Front of Asom and Kamtapuri militants in 2003 in Operation All Clear and in 2008 RBA busted two India Maoist camps inside Bhutan.

The fourth King, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who in 2006 abdicated in favour of his son, present King Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, used to say: “I have put all my eggs in India’s basket. It is a full embrace accepting to be part of the India security system.” Further, he triggered off the democratic process in 2007-08 while compressing the transformation of Bhutan from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy in just five years. Although changes in Bhutan have been controlled, they are substantial: From one newspaper Kuensel, to more than 10 newspapers, magazines and TV channels.

The MEA has done well in Bhutan, in spite of itself creating an impressive amount of goodwill. Bhutan is the single largest budget head, biggest recipient of aid running into billions of dollars. Thanks to Bhutan’s hydropower wealth it enjoys, the highest per capita income in south Asia, having rocketed from $662 in 2005 to $2,750 in 2016, accounting for its supreme bliss of Gross National Happiness and contentment. For India, Bhutan is the most important country, making it Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s first port of call on assumption of office.

The stand-off in Doklam is drawing Bhutan directly into China’s new strategy of segregating Bhutan from India and creating fissures in their relationship. Bo said that the Chinese are adamant about the precondition that Indian troops must withdraw first before any meaningful conversation. India may keep harping on diplomatic channels being open at various levels but there will be no dialogue as NSA Ajit Doval’s failed mission showed.

Instead, New Delhi has to remind the Chinese of their own saying about those who tie the knot must be the first to untie it. By encroaching on Bhutanese territory, the PLA were the first to tie the knot. If argued cogently and with Chinese charecteristics, this could lead to a sequenced or simultaneous withdrawal. Otherwise a long winter awaits Indian and Chinese soldiers at Doklam as Beijing keeps chipping away at Thimpu and creating new pressure points across the 3,488 km Line of Actual Control (as seen at Barahoti last week) where it has manifest tactical advantages. But Bo and his colleagues have to be informed that at Doklam, New Delhi will not let Thimpu down.

---

(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and strategic affairs expert)