Thursday, August 31, 2017

Houston: Inadequate Reservoirs, Bad Planning Exacerbated by Hurricane Harvey

Possibly not the storm of the century or whatever sensationalist spin the media is applying
Decent article via Wired- 

An aerial photograph of Lake Houston's spillway in on August 29, 2017
Addicks and Barker Reservoirs are swaths of placid Texas prairie, wetland, and forest straddling I-10 where it hits Highway 6, about 20 miles west of downtown Houston. But that’s not how nature sees them. To nature, those two open spaces are the top of a hydrological basin that drains through the city and into the Houston Ship Channel.
 Most of the time the reservoirs don’t reserve any water. But when it rains and rains and rains, they fill up, letting water burble through their gates into Buffalo Bayou and out toward the sea, to control flooding.Today, after five days of rain thanks to Hurricane Harvey, Addicks and Barker Reservoirs are as full as full can be. Houses both upstream and down are sitting in feet of water. Believe it or not, that’s how things are supposed to work. The question is whether Houstonians and the Corps are seeing the edge of the dams’ design envelope.
Don't worry, for a moment, about 100-year storms and 500-year storms. Dam builders worry about a different standard: the Probable Maximum Flood.
Probable Maximum Flood
 The PMF is basically the answer to a math problem. (The World Meteorological Organization’s manual for calculating Probable Maximum Precipitation, a necessary precursor, clocks in at a not-easy-to-digest 291 pages, but it’s also in several languages, so that’ll cut your time down.) Basically, hydrologists try to figure out the absolute largest amount of water that could ever come shooting down a watershed, based on storm size and ground characteristics. It’s supposed to be a more deterministic calculation for how tough to build a dam, let's say, than the probabilistic whatever-year storm size.
 Those two Houston reservoirs are full to bursting, thanks to Harvey. That event might have been the big one—but it'll take some math to know for sure.
Pretty sure the media has already decided this event was the big one- No math necessary.


 In 1935 a thunderstorm dropped 16.5 inches of rain—flooding Buffalo Bayou (and therefore Houston) and killing eight people. So the US Army Corps of Engineers stepped in, acquiring the land that’d become the reservoirs. The Corps started building. By 1948, Barker’s irregular trapezoid was surrounded by 72,000 feet of earthen dam on its downstream sides, 36 feet high, and Addicks’ irregular triangle left a scraggly, fractal hypotenuse open upstream and dammed the rest with 61,000 linear feet of dirt almost 50 feet tall at its highest.
Probable Maximum Flood didn’t come into use as a standard until the 1970s. Today, some but not all dams are built to withstand it. (It's unclear if the dams in Texas are built to this standard) Right now, the Corps and others are working to figure out what percentage of the PMF that Harvey reached—and modeling how much water actually came into Houston and the reservoirs. (Corps spokespeople didn’t return requests for comment, but to be fair they’ve been busy.)
By the late-2000s the Corps had rated both Houston reservoirs’ dams and spillways as “extremely high-risk” infrastructure—in part, at least, because the consequences of a failure would be so high. Houston had metastasized since 1948, sending out tendrils and clots of housing and malls where unpaved ground used to absorb rain. And lots of that new construction was in the nominal path of the putative water that’d hypothetically rush downstream from the dams after a theoretical breach.
 That's called bad planning.
 Better to release a little water at a time into Buffalo Bayou and retain the rest than have it all go at once. So in 2015 the Corps of Engineers paid Granite Construction $72 million to upgrade the spillways. They were supposed to be done in 2019.And then came Harvey. “When that first level of spillway gets overwhelmed, you start storing more and more water behind the reservoir, but at some point you have to release that water because you do not want it to overtop the dam,” says Mark Ogden, a technical specialist with the Association of State Dam Safety Officials.
 “Overtopping” is the failure mode. “It’s an earthen embankment, a dirt cross section,” Stannard says. “If water flows uncontrolled over the top, it can erode away the dirt and cause the whole dam to fail.” As of Wednesday night, Addicks had 178,000 acre-feet of water behind its dam, and Barker had almost 170,000. You don’t want all of that hitting the city at once.
The reservoirs filled to record levels. Water got to 109 feet above sea level at Addicks. Areas on the upstream side of the reservoirs flooded. But of course a large release of water from the reservoirs means downstream flooding along Buffalo Bayou, too. “The operation is then a balancing act between how much water you release versus how much you store to keep from overtopping,” Ogden says.
So the Army Corps of Engineers opened the floodgates. Just a little at first, a few hundred cubic feet of water per second, and then wide—7,500 cfs from Barker and 6,300 cfs from Addicks, looking to go up to 8,000 cfs from both later in the week. And the rest of the city is draining into Buffalo Bayou, too. Thousands of houses are flooded. That number might reach 100,000.
The Army Corp of Engineers opened the floodgates and flooded thousands of homes. Was this a necessary action?
 Houston has been worried about the reservoirs for years. Back in 2012(5 years ago) the local Houston Press did a disaster-gonna-get-us story about them; last year ProPublica published a prescient article about the possible damage a hurricane could do to Houston, faulting the Army Corps of Engineers and policymakers for not better managing the floodplain. The Atlantic attributed Houston’s current plight to much the same—misguided or insufficient attempts to engineer away the problem of urban sprawl across a vast watershed prone to hurricanes
More of that bad planning... Not actually considering the terrain 

So the question is, are the at-capacity reservoirs experiencing the PMF? Even if the calculation had been around in the 1940s, today’s watershed might have changed since the dams were built.
So that's interesting to consider. 
-Are/were the reservoirs experiencing their maximum level/capacity? 
-Would they have spilled over? 
-Was it necessary to flood thousands and thousands of homes?
-Why wasn't there an alternative diversionary structure built to avoid flooding a major city?

 In Houston, all that new pavement means water runs off the ground faster instead of percolating downward, further changing the watershed’s characteristics.
 Hydrologists might not yet know what percentage of the PMF Harvey hit, and the PMF itself might be getting bigger. Maybe no amount of drains, dikes, levees, reservoirs, and canals could deal with that. Houston's history is one of engineering solutions to the problem of getting stormwater out of town.

I liked this article because it mostly, rationally addressed the very many issues facing Houston..
A  very large city built in a less then ideal location.  
This somewhat reminds me of New Orleans- Wasn't there an intentional flooding or carelessness there also? Can't recall exactly. But it seems there was something....

From Earlier today:

PKK Seek to Annex Khanasor & Join It To Rojova

A follow up to today's earlier post:
PKK seeking to annex Khanasor to Rojava cantons: Official 

Iraq and Syria conflicts threatens to reshape regional map

 With news from a few months back:

 From June of this year:

 (BasNews/ Syria News) Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) forces in the Yezidi majority region of Sinjar are intending to link Khanasor district in the region to Rojava’s (Syrian Kurdistan) self-ruling cantons.

Waisi Naif, Chair of Sinjar Mayoral Council, told BasNews PKK is trying to annex Khanasor administration to Rojava, thus it has begun committing administrative violations by applying [Rojava] cantons’ administrative orders in Khanasor.”

Naif warned PKK against any violations over the official administration of Sinjar, stressing that all such efforts will be futile. 

“PKK is constantly bringing people from Rojava to Khanasor to take over the administration of the area,” said the official, adding that PKK has enrolled many people in its military units and stationed them in the district"

PKK entered Sinjar after the Peshmerga forces recaptured it from the Islamic State (IS) militants in November 2015 after it was overrun by the militants in 2014. Ever since, the PKK forces have refused to withdraw from the area, creating tensions in the district and impeding the IDPs’ returns.

Moreover, Hashd al-Shaabi Iraqi Shi’ite paramilitary, in coordination and cooperation with PKK, managed lately to reach the Iraq-Syria border after taking control of a number of Yezidi areas in southern Sinjar.

Iraq and Syria conflicts threatens to reshape regional map

IHS Janes

Let's see, how many years have I been writing on this remake? 
IHS Janes, just stating the obvious.

Jonathan Spyer - IHS Jane's Intelligence Review
30 August 2017
Key Points

    The prospect of Iraq and Syria returning to a system of centralised governance by a single authority is extremely low, although the Islamic State will lose its territorial holdings in the region and revert to insurgency.
    There is no reasonable scenario in the coming five years in which the Syrian government can be defeated by rebel forces, but the complete re-conquest of all Syrian territory by government forces is equally unlikely.
    De facto changes to the regional map will include the survival of a Kurdish enclave of considerable size in northeastern Syria and the establishment of a quasi-independent Kurdistan.

Must be just a coincidence that the plan, that was unfolding in plain site,  looks to be coming to fruition. For all the coincidence theorists out and about...

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

The Myth of White Privilege- The Reality of White Slavery

Sigh..... I’m tired of reading this term.”White Privilege”
: the unfair use of statements about race to try to influence the actions or attitudes of a particular group of people
It’s simple race baiting at it’s most abhorrent and yet no one recognizes it for what it is.

There was a discussion on the topic of slavery taking place over at Syper’s.
Some were pointing out the FACT of white slavery. Such as your’s truly.
Yet one person insisted on using arbitrary parameters to define slaves (blacks) vs indentured servitude (whites) This is sophistry and political correctness at it’s most appalling and offensive.

Without entirely relinquishing familial privacy... I’ll make the case that whites have indeed been slaves. While making clear white slavery doesn’t get any notice or attention. Why might that be?
My contention is recognizing this REALITY does not serve the political agendas of the past several decades- Particularly since the 60's. To recognize the reality of white slavery would reduce or take away from the idea of the uniqueness of black slavery. This idea of uniqueness is one we’ve had seeded into our psyche.  We’ve been inculcated with this idea that the only slaves, through out all of history, have been black persons from Africa. And that’s due to the bad ‘white man’ and his rampant racism.

Not to downplay black slavery. Indeed, there were black slaves. And they endured horrific treatment.  But, why, why is there any such thing as slavery. That's the real question no one asks.
Of blacks or whites? Chinese?  Men? Women? Children? Etc.,  Why is their, in existence today, the modern day incarnation of the slave trade. The one known as the global labour market? (yes that is just another slave trade that barely gets notice and isn't called what it is!)  The simplest and most obvious motivation for slavery is profit- Plain and simple. Filthy Lucre.



Black persons involved in the black slave trade- Including black owners, of black slaves

I have no doubt that there were plenty of black persons complicit in the trade of other blacks. It’s only sensible. There had to have been blacks partnered with the non black slave traders - A very brief search brings up an article almost immediately verifying what already seemed obvious.

African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
Tribal leader Ancestors Sold People to Slave Traders
“The Civil Rights Congress of Nigeria has written to tribal chiefs saying: "We cannot continue to blame the white men, as Africans, particularly the traditional rulers, are not blameless."
Is it not even more heinous that a black tribal leader would sell his own people into slavery?

The idea that the ‘bad white man’ was doing this without conspiring with tribal leaders, who obviously, had followers, is absurd- Common sense, if people had any, would have seen this obvious truth already occurring to the masses.

 An estimated 3,000 blacks owned a total of 20,000 black slaves in the year 1860

Jewish Slavers 

Then of course, besides the evil white man, we had the Jews heavily involved in the slave trade.
An irrefutable fact, admitted by the jews themselves- Indisputable- Where’s their guilt burden?
Why is it only the anglo white man that has to own all the guilt for the slave trade? 

 JTA
“Money was earned by Jewish communities in South America, partly through slavery, and went to Holland, where Jewish bankers handled it,” he said. “Non-Jews were also complicit, but so were we. I feel partly complicit.”
Forward: History of Dutch Jews Role in Slavery Is Bluntly Depicted
“A few days after their arrival, slaves were sold here to Dutch and Portuguese Jewish merchants,” an exhibition wall text notes of Wagenaer’s illustration, one of very few representing the slave trade. Half of the slaves died from hunger and thirst en route to Brazil, according to the exhibit catalog.Read more: http://forward.com/culture/art/310222/jewish-slavery-caribbean-exhibition/
“A few days after their arrival, slaves were sold here to Dutch and Portuguese Jewish merchants,” an exhibition wall text notes of Wagenaer’s illustration, one of very few representing the slave trade. Half of the slaves died from hunger and thirst en route to Brazil, according to the exhibit catalog.Read more: http://forward.com/culture/art/310222/jewish-slavery-caribbean-exhibition/
“A few days after their arrival, slaves were sold here to Dutch and Portuguese Jewish merchants,” an exhibition wall text notes of Wagenaer’s illustration, one of very few representing the slave trade. Half of the slaves died from hunger and thirst en route to Brazil, according to the exhibit catalog.Read more: http://forward.com/culture/art/310222/jewish-slavery-caribbean-exhibition/
Jews were given special dispensation to work their slaves on Sunday instead of Saturday
Jews and the Slave Trade

Very clearly the slave trade was an all ethnicity, religion and colour- money making opportunity! Just the facts!! If you can handle facts, truth and reality? 

If your prefer perception managed indoctrination I guess you should read no further?


 What about White Slaves?

Found this first article which is based on this second article
Banner images used are from the highlighted article
 In England, the recruiting agents who were polite enough not to bop you on the head and drag you onto a slaveship were called “drums,” because they restricted their activity to drumming up recruits. Those who slipped a mickey in your beer or overpowered you in a grimy alley were called “crimps” or “spirits.” The spirit, perhaps accompanied by several other burly ghosts, would snatch his prey quietly and suddenly. If a person disappeared suspiciously, they were thought to have been “spirited away.” According to historian Richard Hofstadter, the spirit was someone who “waylaid, kidnapped, or induced adults to get aboard ships for America. Often their victims were taken roughly in hand.”13 Gary B. Nash writes that “Kidnapping and shanghaiing of drifters and drunks was endemic. Many unfortunate seaport dwellers awakened one morning with a head-splitting hangover to find themselves in the hold of a ship headed westward across the Atlantic.”14
A British folk song from the era conjures the chilling subconscious havoc wrought by the spirit gangs:

    The night I was a-married,/
    And on my marriage bed,/
    There come a fierce sea captain/
    And stood by my bed stead.
    His men, they bound me tightly/
    With a rope so cruel and strong,/
    And carried me over the waters/
    To labor for seven years long.15

Adults weren’t the only whites being kidnapped and sold into colonial slavery. Forcible seizure of homeless and orphaned children was widespread. It was commonly known as “kid-nabbing,” later mangled by the Cockneys into “kidnapping.Hundred of thousands of British kids were nabbed into slave work not only for colonial plantations, but also into forced domestic child labor for Britain’s smoke-snorting industrial machine.16
Because kidnapped men, women, and children were assigned forged contracts of indenture—or, in several cases, no indentures at all until they arrived in the New World—it’s difficult to gauge what percentage of white indentured servants came here against their will. In The Mind of the South, W.J. Cash guesses that “the greater number” of indentured servants “seem to have been mere children or adolescents, lured from home by professional crimps or outright kidnapped.”17
 
As with black slaves from Africa, white slaves from Europe were being kidnapped and shipped overseas not for reasons of unvarnished human hatred, but because it was profitable. When all the horrors are peeled away, the spirit business was precisely that—a business. Without a strong profit motive, the wholesale seizure of white flesh wouldn’t have occurred. “One could kidnap a man at random in the alleys of London and be sure of a ready sale for him in the South,” writes Thomas J. Wertenbaker in The First Americans.18 An ad in a 1784 New York newspaper refers to a still-vibrant “traffick of white people,”19 and an 1829 judicial decision notes that “It was formerly a considerable business to import Irish and German servants.”20

In the course of our comment exchange at Syper I mentioned that one of my grandparents (grandfather) was a Barnardo Home boy- White/blue eyed and enslaved at the age of 8.
 We have a copy of one of his “contracts”. (Another individual shared the contract of their ancestor with the Star)  It’s quite shocking for me to both read and understand his predicament as one of this slave child’s ancestors. Where are my reparations???? 

 Sadly, I never did meet him. The extreme hardship he endured in his life contributed to general poor health and his early death. He never knew his many grandchildren or great grandchildren. Truth be told, he had family in England- I met one member long afterwards.  I'm uncertain if he had ever seen them after he was shipped here, prior to his passing.


I suspect, in all honesty, and believe there is enough information available to support the contention, that this shipping of very young children to places like Canada & Australia was little more then a money making scheme done under the guise of charity. For profit, slavery.

Showing nothing has changed from the past to now regarding the charity racket. Or the slavery racket. And the enslavement of these white British children comes after the black slave trade we hear and read and view so much about.

  The wages (indentured servitude)  supposed to have been paid and held in trust were most often never given to the children- I suspect, but, haven’t researched on whether or not fees were paid to the ‘charitable groups’ to have a child slave sent to you. A few of the children may have got lucky, but, abuse was rampant. Home girls were raped. Quite likely home boys were also raped.

But none of this matters because they were “privileged whites” Or so the story goes?
Of course, please do assume,  the privileged white ancestors are still benefiting from all this  white privilege to this day- NOT! -I'm obviously being completely facetious 
More then 100,000 allegedly orphaned, but most likely children stolen for profit were sent to
Canada alone. Others went elsewhere.

Walter Knight (Left) - Where was his so called white privilege?
The Star

Here is some coverage on a few of the  children shipped to Canada

Dozens of ‘British home children’ lie forgotten in Etobicoke cemetery
Charles Bradbury was still a child when his throat was slit with a razor on Feb. 1, 1897. His charred remains were found the same day in a burned-down barn near the Don River
Charles is one of 75 children whose remains lie buried, unmarked and virtually forgotten in a pair of mass graves at an Etobicoke cemetery. They were drops in the wave of British home children, sent in droves from the U.K. to build a fresh life on Canadian soil.
One article from 1905 on the death of a 15-year-old Barnado’s child reads: “The autopsy showed he had been prodded with a pitchfork, was under-nourished and poorly clad and bruised, had severely frostbitten hands and feet, and fractured skull. He lay on a bed of manure in his coffin.”
At the time, authorities believed they were solving a problem: destitute children in the overcrowded, disease-riddled cities of Victorian Britain needed a fresh start; Canada’s mostly rural population needed labour.
All too often, the freshly minted farm hands and domestics — many as young as 10 — emerged from poverty or orphanhood overseas to find abuse, neglect and isolation waiting on the other side.
Barnardo’s did not respond to requests for comment.
Agreement of servitude aka slavery- 
This copy of the indenture agreement for British Home Child Cecil Bennett binds him to work as a farm labourer for five and a half years at $21 per year. From that amount would be deducted all his expenses, clothing, haircuts and other “necessaries.”
Very familiar looking
Expecting to learn of a dozen plots at most, Oschefski contacted the cemetery. They sent her a list of 75.

“That just blew me away,” Oschefski said.

Over 50 years, their remains were piled into plots intended for no more than 24 caskets.
Jennifer Harrington, who curated an ongoing home child exhibit at Black Creek Pioneer Village, said many home children “were treated poorly, or even terribly abused.”

Harrington noted the sense of shame that accompanied the term Home Child. “They felt a bit like outcasts, and sometimes they were treated that way.”

“They worked on the farm with the idea that they would … have a nest egg once they were adults,” released from their contract at 18, with their meager earnings supposedly held in trust by organizations like Barnardo’s,” Harrington said. “Payment didn’t always happen.”
Bound to labour
This “after-sailing notice” from Dr. Barnardo’s Homes illustrates how the agency sent kids to Canada without alerting the parents beforehand. Parents lost their rights as guardians once a child was placed into care. “It destroyed these families; it destroyed these people,” says researcher Lori Oschefski.
Benjamin Butterworth
Benjamin Butterworth, an orphan and milk delivery boy now buried at Park Lawn, stepped onto the tracks as two trains were approaching from opposite directions. He died from the impact in hospital at age 15 on Nov. 13, 1898. “The children were labelled as trouble-makers and degenerates by Canadian press and by society,” Oschefski says. “If anything happened, they were blamed.”
Stepped onto the train tracks as two trains were approaching from opposite directions? Was it suicide to end what may have been insufferable living conditions? Did he wonder about his mom and dad?

Albert Jefkins, left, worked on a farm in Ontario as a boy.

British Home Children
For the most part, these children were not picked up from the streets but came from intact families, who, through sickness or even death of one of their parents, had fallen on hard times. Because there was no social system in place to help them get through these difficult circumstances, the family had no other way than to surrender their offspring to the organizations.

Sometimes this was meant to be a temporary solution until the family got back on their feet and there are cases on record where some parents went back to pick their children up, only to find that they had already been sent away. Sometimes the parents received an ‘after sailing’ notification, informing that their children had been emigrated a week before.
Link

BBC

No one in their right mind, while maintaining a straight face, cannot call this anything but slavery. It may not fit your Hollywood implanted arbitrary parameter of what constitutes “slavery’ , brought to us via Roots, the Colour Purple and so many others movies promoting a specific idea or concept, (because really not to many people read books and most people, pathetically, believe reality as presented on their screen)  but real life isn’t Hollywood and Hollywood isn’t real life. Hollywood is an artificial representation of reality complete with political motivations.  Always. It is the simulacrum.
 “The American motion picture is the greatest unconscious carrier of propaganda in the world to-day. It is a great distributor for ideas and opinions.  The motion picture can standardize the ideas and habits of a nation.” (Bernays 1928)   
 If you're offended that's your problem-I'm offended at the very idea that persons like my Grandfather and all their respective descendants, of which there are many, are constantly demonized, bullied and shamed into feeling guilty for 'black slavery' when they had nothing to do with it! The white descendants from slaves are not recognized as such because, recognizing this obvious fact would disable the campaign of guilt and shame employed against such persons.

A form of collective punishment is employed against all targeted persons (white christians) for actions they are not responsible for
Collective punishment: Penalty imposed on every member of a group without regard to his or her involvement in the group's actions and conduct.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Pretext Alert? US Claims Troops Exchanged Fire With Turkish Backed Rebels.

But, this exchange took place last week.
If it took place at all? So why report this specific news, at this time?
An entire week later.
Is this the pretext needed by the US/PKK/YPG to annex all of Northern Syria by running through the Turkish backed rebels, enabling the joining of the claimed Kurdish cantons?
 
First on CNN?
US troops in northern Syria came under direct attack last week by Turkish-backed rebels, a (unnamed!) military official with the coalition fighting ISIS told CNN Tuesday. The official said that while US troops returned fire there were no casualties on either side.
The coalition believes the attackers are part of the Turkish-backed opposition forces, a loose grouping of Arab and Turkmen fighters that have helped the Turkish military clear ISIS from the Turkish-Syria border area. 
Many of these Turkey-supported forces originated as part of the opposition to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and they have also clashed with the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in a struggle for influence in the region.
While Turkey has in the past backed these fighters with tanks, airstrikes and special forces, the coalition official made it clear that Turkish soldiers were not involved in the recent attacks on US personnel.

But the (unnamed!) official added that the coalition had delivered a demarche, or diplomatic protest, to Ankara following the attack on US forces by Turkey's allies.
Did any of this actually occur last week? As of now this is reading like suspiciously timed innuendo.
The incident occurred around the same time US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis visited Turkey to meet with his Turkish counterpart and the country's President Recep Erdogan. There was no mention of any conversations about the incident in the official readout of the meeting provided by the Pentagon. 
No mention of the incident in the official readout provided by the Pentagon. Why not?
The recent clash comes weeks after attacks against US troops in the area were first reported and confirmed by coalition spokesman Col. Ryan Dillon. Following those attacks, Dillon said US and coalition troops "reserve the right to defend ourselves."
US forces have been in northern Syria for months where they are performing a de facto "peacekeeping" role in an effort to prevent clashes between various armed groups in the region. While Pentagon spokesman US Navy Capt. Jeff Davis declined to call the troops "peacekeepers" upon their initial deployment in March, he referred to them as "a visible reminder for anybody looking to start a fight."
Lebanon, Hezbollah suspend ISIS fight for soldiers' release
The whole narrative is questionable!

The first report "US Army Col. Ryan Dillon told reporters at the Pentagon that the US forces came under attack by small arms fire and that the engagement had resulted in "no damage to equipment or casualties on our side."

No group mentioned as the attackers. Small arms fire? Could have been just about anyone, then? This whole report has me feeling uncomfortable. Is the US and their Kurdish lackies looking for a pretext?
 
Rehash: Dillon said at the time ( reference back to first report)  that the attacking forces were most likely aware that they were firing on US troops.
None of the information below, nor the sentence immediately above, are related to this latest incident. It's just a rehash of the news from nearly three weeks ago
Rehash: "These patrols are overt. Our forces are clearly marked and we have been operating in that area for some time," Dillon said, adding, "It should not be news to anyone that we are doing this, operating in that particular area."
US troops have been performing "overt patrols" in the area since March, often flying the American flag from armored vehicles, in a bid to deter forces in the region from attacking one another and undermining the fight against ISIS.
The US trains and advises the Manbij Military Council, a group of local Arab fighters that is allied to the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces. But Turkey and its local Syrian allies are strongly opposed to both US-backed groups which they see as linked to Kurdish separatists in Turkey.
"We take appropriate measures to try and minimize the risk of those events happening. But they do happen, and of course, all coalition forces have the inherent right of self-defense at their disposal, should they feel the need," the Deputy Commander of the counter ISIS coalition, UK Army Maj. Gen. Rupert Jones, told reporters at the Pentagon last week.
 And is the new above related to the earlier post?

Is this the basis for, the beginnings of, balkanizing Syria?

  To be considered with the information from yesterday

Syria's Buffer Zone Along the Euphrates

Is this the basis for, the beginnings of, balkanizing Syria?

Atlantic Council
The Pentagon announced on August 21 that it agreed to a buffer zone (or deconfliction line) that roughly adhered to the Euphrates River.
 "The U.S.-led coalition, its principal Syrian ally, Russia and the Syrian regime have agreed to a geographical "deconfliction line" or buffer zone in northeastern Syria meant to prevent clashes and focus military efforts on Daesh, the Pentagon confirmed Sunday"
This new buffer zone agreement re-establishes a previous agreement and was reached after the United States shot down a Syrian regime SU-22 in June, creating fears of escalation that could draw international players into direct conflict. While the immediate purpose of the buffer zone is to prevent fighting between the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)—and their myriad respective associated backers—to focus the fighting on defeating the Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh), it also reconfigures the battlefield and creates new pitfalls and opportunities.

 The buffer zone has effects beyond allowing the SDF and United States to focus on fighting ISIS. The US military imposed a similar buffer zone on May 1 to prevent fighting between the Turkish Euphrates Shield operation and SDF forces, particularly the Kurdish elements trying to unite their territories in northern Syria. Like the buffer zone along the Euphrates, the May buffer zone was meant to prevent fighting so the SDF could focus on fighting ISIS. It effectively blocked Turkish forces from advancing further south into Syria and prompted Turkey to announce the end of Euphrates Shield soon after. The buffer zone became a de facto border around Turkish-occupied territory. Turkey now controls a small area of land in northern Syria and is focused on stabilization and reconstruction activities.

 
The buffer zone along the Euphrates will have a similar immediate effect, acting as a de facto border between regime and SDF controlled territory. The question is whether the two sides’ major backers (Russia and Iran for the regime, and the United States for the SDF) will adhere to and enforce the buffer zone. In the past, when the regime has found no interest in adhering to a ceasefire, it simply violated it and attacked the opposition. Neither Russia nor the United States used their military might or influence to enforce the ceasefires and the Assad regime, as the major violator, generally justified its actions by claiming to attack extremist groups excluded from the ceasefire. While often a partner on paper to ceasefires, Russia has typically found itself either unable to or unwilling to force Assad to adhere to their conditions; Russia itself often violated the various ceasefires. Without Russian support, the regime is unlikely to be able to fight the SDF, since the regime would not have been able to seize territory from rebels or ISIS without foreign support and in fact was in retreat from rebels before the Russian intervention in September 2015.

As the SDF continues to move east toward the Syria-Iraq border, questions of territorial control become more pressing. A number of cities and villages along the Euphrates, some in fact bisected by the waterway, and one of the major highways going into Iraq run parallel to the river. If the buffer zone extends all along the Euphrates river, this partition raises the question of how these cities will be divided between SDF and regime, not to mention who will seize control of the road. Assad and his backers, particularly Iran, want a land route from Iraq to Syria and out to Lebanon to ensure their strategic hold on the region. The regime currently controls the military airport in Deir Ezzor on the southwest side of the Euphrates, placing the highway on the regime side of the buffer zone if it were extended along the Euphrates. After the defeat of ISIS in Mosul, however, the United States can choose to exert control over the highway from the Iraq side of the border. While Iran would undoubtedly want to pressure Iraq to reject US monitoring of the road, Baghdad has been reluctant to defy Washington in the hopes of continued support. The Syrian opposition controls another highway further south, near the juncture of the Syria-Iraq-Jordanian border, but the road remains vulnerable to attack by Assad’s forces. If the United States and the SDF deny the Euphrates highway to the regime, the southern highway will undoubtedly fall under greater pressure.

The buffer zone also raises question over the control of resources. While the territory northeast of the Euphrates (the SDF side) is rich in natural resources, the Kurdish elements that dominate northern Syria and the SDF—the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its military arm, the People’s Protection Units (YPG)—seem willing to work with the Assad regime in return for some measure of autonomy. Even if the PYD and regime can come to an agreement, however, some areas will remain contentious. The SDF now controls the three largest dams in Syria (the Euphrates, Baath, and Tishrin dams), which fall on the SDF side of the deconfliction line. With these dams, the SDF controls the output of hydroelectric power from the dams and the flow of water to 80 percent of Syria’s irrigated agricultural land. Assad will not likely tolerate complete dependence on Kurdish good will to run the agricultural sector. Even if he were partial to the idea, such an arrangement could not last indefinitely.
I've mentioned on several occasions the control of water and electric resources now guaranteed by the US occupiers of Syria to give the PKK/YPG the upper hand- Leaving all the rest of Syria at the mercy of the US/Kurdish Occupiers
Russia and the United States may also have interests divergent in eastern Syrian than those in western Syria where the various ceasefires were reached. The United States maintains a large ground presence in eastern Syria—set up ostensibly to support the SDF in its fight against ISIS. Russia, however, would like to support its allies consolidate control and project power as Assad’s forces approaches the area. Any intrusion from Assad and his international backers onto the northeast side of the river would threaten to escalate the conflict at the international level. After Russia bombed a US proxy force in southern Syria in 2016, the United States and Russia have tried to avoid direct conflict. In recent months, the Pentagon has demonstrated an increased US willingness to defend against regime forces and its allied militias.

The real problems will begin to surface after the tenuous alliances finally defeat ISIS militarily. At that point, the United States will have to find a way to justify not only its presence in Syria, but also the existence of the buffer zone—particularly if the Kurdish PYD and Assad regime can come to some separate deconfliction agreement. The United States has justified its presence in Syria as an extension of its mission in Iraq to defeat ISIS, but defeating ISIS will raise questions regarding the legality of any continued presence in Syria. Whereas the Iraqi government has asked for US support, the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad has not. If the United States acknowledges the Syrian government as a legitimate governing body and sovereign state, it would face increased pressure to adhere to Assad’s inevitable demand for US forces to leave.

The buffer zone has created a new consolidated zone of influence for the United States and the SDF, but its future remains in question. Strategic territory, roadways, and resources will undoubtedly tempt the Assad regime to test the extent to which it can regain control, but the US posture will serve as a balance against the Syria-Russia-Iran triad for as long as the United States can justify its stay.
If Washington can convince Assad that he will need US military might and resources to maintain stability in at least the northeastern part of the country, it can provide the US with an opportunity to help and direct the path of post-conflict reconstruction and influence the political trajectory after the war. But with Russia’s desire to project power in the region, Iran’s hostile stance toward the West, and Assad’s desire to regain control over the country, it will require an extraordinary political effort—one the Trump administration has not indicated it is willing to make.
 Leaving the prospect of US permanent occupation of Syria alongside the PKK/YPG terror army? In full control of vast swathes of land and the majority of the resources?

Monday, August 28, 2017

One Day in September Could Wreak Havoc In the Middle East

 That day is, of course, September 25 2017. (We may all want to keep that date firmly in our minds)  When the semi autonomous "Kurdish" region in Iraq votes for "independence" What will occur afterwards? Will the US and Israel really sit on the sidelines as this oped writer suggests? I find that contention absurd!

Kurdistan Independence: One Day in September Could Wreak Havoc in the Middle East
Oped via Haaretz
 If Iraqi Kurds vote in referendum for independence next month, Iran and Turkey could launch an invasion, (possible, entirely possible)  while Israel and the U.S. may be forced to sit on the sidelines to protect ties with Ankara (I don't believe that for a moment)
"How often do the governments and regimes of the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Iraq and Syria agree on the same policy? Next to never. But for once, they are on the same page about an event scheduled to take place a month from now. All are trying, in some cases using threats, to stop the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), the semi-autonomous administration of the Kurdish region in Northern Iraq, from holding an independence referendum on September 25. (I've seen no real indication the US or Israel is opposed to this referendum- In fact it seems more sensible they need the referendum to advance their remake the region agenda. Not sure about Russia? Definitely got the idea that Iran and Turkey are opposed!)
Flashback  Assad's Speech - Eyes On The Deir Ez-Zor Keystone


Flashback:  US Increases Military Posts in Kurd Annexed Syria: Vindicated Again
"The KRG has declared that the referendum will be “binding” - in other words, if a majority of the 5 million voters choose independence, as is widely expected, they will initiate the breakaway process. Iraq’s Shi’ite-dominated government in Baghdad has made it clear that they will not recognize the referendum’s results, but it is unclear how they can prevent Kurdish independence.

Iraq’s army is still relatively weak and tied up with fighting ISIS, (that's fortunate for the remake the region agenda, no?)  and it has no bases in Iraqi Kurdistan, where the Kurdish Peshmerga militia controls security and the borders. Iraq can however rely on much more powerful neighbors to oppose the Kurds' departure. It will be a very difficult divorce for both sides"

Kurdistan

"Last Wednesday, the chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces, General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri, made a rare visit to Ankara. (covered in flashback above) On the agenda was Iran and Turkey’s joint opposition to Kurdish independence. Both countries share borders with Iraqi Kurdistan and have large Kurdish minorities (an estimated three-quarters of all the Kurds in the Middle East live in Turkey and Iran) which could seek to break away and join a new independent Kurdistan.

Turkey’s President Reccep Tayip Erdogan, who until a few years ago supported a peace agreement with the Kurds in his country, ( Until the PKK ended the ceasefire) has pursued a hard-line nationalist anti-Kurd (Anti PKK- anti terror) policy of late, which has included the arrest of most of the members of the (Identity Politics- Divisive)  HDP Kurdish party. An independent Kurdistan would be a boost for Turkey's Kurdish citizens. (Would it be? Spin with no substance is just spin. Many of Turkey's kurds have voted for Erdogan's AKP party- By that I mean lots and lots of them who do not support the PKK)

Flashback:  July 28/2015: PKK Ended Ceasefire Weeks Ago? A stream of the latest news
"Iran also has additional reasons to block Kurdish independence. The Kurds of Iraq control key border regions with Iran and Syria, regions which Iran plans to dominate to create a land-corridor from Iran to the Mediterranean, thought Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. While, for domestic reasons, Erdogan has been talking up in recent days the prospect of joint Turkish-Iranian action against Kurdish independence in Iraq, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have sought to squelch such talk. It could harm their attempts to push forward military operations already taking place, in which they would prefer for now to cooperate with various Kurdish forces on the ground. But a month from now, if in the wake of the referendum the Kurds seriously embark on the path independence, an Iranian-Turkish alliance to violently quash it is a distinct possibility.

Recognizing that these developments could make matters in the region even more volatile, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis was in the Kurdish capital Erbil this week, urging KRG President Masoud Barazani to postpone the referendum. The US has been working closely both with the Iraqi government and with the Kurds on fighting ISIS both in Iraq and Syria. The American-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, which consists mainly of Kurdish fighters, is now at the forefront of the battle for capturing Raqqa, ISIS’ main base in Syria. Kurds are also expected to be heavily involved in the next stage of fighting, against ISIS’ last major strongholds in the Euphrates Valley, on either side of the Syria-Iraq border.

The war against ISIS is currently the only semi-coherent policy the Trump administration has in the Middle East, and Mattis is understandably concerned that a conflict over Kurdish independence will create further discord among what is already a disparate anti-ISIS alliance. But Barazani is extremely unlikely to back down, weeks before the referendum. Since 2014, KRG has de facto been disconnected from the central government in Baghdad.

The Kurds have sought to independently export oil from the rich oilfields around Kirkuk, leading the Iraqi government to cut off allocations from the state budget. As the export has proved problematic and oil prices plummeted, the Kurdish region has been cast into a deep financial crisis. Three years ago, hopes for an energy boom were high in Iraqi Kurdistan, new hotels and office blocks were being built in the main cities, which were linked by new wide highways. “Everything now is at a standstill,” laments one businessman from the city of Dohuk. “The hotels are empty, no investment is coming in and independence seems like the solution to all our troubles.”

An independent Kurdistan

"Can an independent Kurdistan survive? Landlocked and dependent on oil exports, it will have to reach some kind of deal with one of its neighbors to allow it to ship the oil out. But they are all resolutely opposed to Kurdish independence. There are internal challenges as well. The KRG’s political system is deeply divided between the main dynasties that control the political parties. Corruption is rife and the Peshmerga militia is a brave fighting force, which for two years, as the Iraqi army crumbled, was the only one opposing ISIS, but it also includes tens of thousands of ageing veterans who are paid pensions while moonlighting as security guards. Lacking sufficient heavy weaponry, the Peshmerga will be hard pressed to defend Kurdistan should Turkey or Iran decide to invade, with or without the invitation of the Iraqi government"

As of yet, notice, the Haaretz article doesn’t mention the huge role of the PKK in this entire situation? As if the PKK doesn’t even exist. Isn’t heavily armed by the UK/Usrael.-  Why is that? Obfuscation, of course!

"One country the Kurds are hoping to receive assistance from is Israel, which was one of the first customers for their oil. While some Israeli politicians have openly expressed support for Kurdish independence, the government has been careful not to take a position. There are a number of advantages for Israel in an independent Kurdistan. Its location astride Iran’s route to Syria and Lebanon is just the most obvious one. Kurdistan would be a headache not just for Iran, but for other potential rivals including Iraq, Turkey and Syria. Israeli businessmen are already welcome in Erbil, and the development needs of a new emerging and potentially pro-western nation would be worth billions. But Israel is loath at this point to do anything without coordination with the Americans.

Israel is also gingerly trying to rebuild the once strategic relationship with Turkey.  (Turkey can see the knife behind Israel's back) Diplomatic ties have been renewed but there is still a long way to go before the level of cooperation the countries once had can be restored. (Oh there it is!) As it stands, Turkey is the only neighbor of the Kurds with which Israel has open relations and through which the Kurdish oil can be shipped. In the short-term, the Kurds can create a lot of problems for Israel’s rivals in the region but for any long-term prospect of a regional alliance which will keep Iran out, Israel needs Turkey and Kurdistan to come to an understanding. The referendum won’t help that happen and the Kurdish expectations that Israel will swiftly recognize their independence are probably unfounded for now"
 The Kurds have been creating a whole lot of problem already for Israel's rivals- Which serves Israel just fine.

Flashback: Shlomo Ben Ami: “The Case for Kurdistan” As History Repeats

Flashback: Israel & the Kurds: Love by Proxy

Flashback: Kurdistan aka “Second Israel”- Ethnic Cleansing the Indigenous of the Middle East

 From earlier today..

Origins of the ADL- Leo Frank and the Murder of Mary Phagan

Origins of the ADL- Leo Frank and the Murder of Mary Phagan

In the previous post ,Tim Kelly Interviews E. Michael Jones: Meyer Lansky & The Cincinatti Ballet, I'd mentioned the questionable origins of the ADL. As an organization does it truly seek justice for those "defamed" ?
 Can't help but notice after  the Charlottesville incident, the ADL is one of the main mouthpieces to the media presenting the narrative we're supposed to believe. Southern Poverty Law Centre being another one. Why should we believe these narratives? The presenter and what is presented? Why is the ADL telling us what to think?  Who does the ADL really serve?  I'm going to save the historical creation of the ADL for another post! (It's a doozy) Knowing what I do know about the ADL, it has to be asked why should we accept any narrative that organization presents as worthy? What do they have to gain from pushing the anti christian black vs white narrative? More cultural degradation? More divisive identity politics?

 Anti Defamation League-

Defamation - Defamation is a statement that injures a third party's reputation

Therefore the Anti -defamation Leagues role is to prevent injury to "a third party" 

Rehash: random first party, can make a comment to a random second party, but it is the alleged injury to some mystical, random, whatever, third party, the ADL is attempting to prevent through it's so claimed anti defamation league
Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and must have been made to someone other than the person defamed

 The ADL was created immediately preceding or possibly during the Leo Frank trial for the  attempted raping and killing of a very young Irish American girl, Mary Phagan.


Mary Phagan
MARY PHAGAN was just thirteen years old. She was a sweatshop laborer for Atlanta, Georgia’s National Pencil Company. Exactly 100 years ago today — Saturday, April 26, 1913 — little Mary (pictured, artist’s depiction) was looking forward to the festivities of Confederate Memorial Day. She dressed gaily and planned to attend the parade. She had just come to collect her $1.20 pay from National Pencil Company superintendent Leo M. Frank at his office when she was attacked by an assailant who struck her down, ripped her undergarments, likely attempted to sexually abuse her, and then strangled her to death. Her body was dumped in the factory basement.

100 Reasons Leo Frank Is Guilty

Leo Frank, a jewish man, who despite a ton of interference was found guilty of the attempted rape and brutal murder of 13 year old Mary Phagan. Yes, that's right a 13 year old child. When justice was overturned by the outgoing Governor the people took justice into their own hands, and they hung Mr Leo Frank themselves.

Of course the usual cries of antisemitism reverberated.
The outspoken agrarian populist and publisher, Tom Watson, wrote extensively and critically of the case, paying special attention to the charges of anti-Semitism; His publication, Watson’s Magazine, echoed sentiments similar to Dorsey’s.
In his magazine, Watson wrote,
Far and wide, the accusation has been strewn, that we [Southerners] are prejudiced against this young libertine [Frank], because he is a Jew. If there is such a racial dislike of the Hebrews among us, why is it that, in the formation of the Southern Confederacy, we placed a Jew in the Cabinet, and kept him there to the last? Why is it, we are constantly electing Jews to the State legislatures, and to Congress?”

Judging by all I've read Mr Frank was a pervert, sexual predator and a pedophile Other young women testified he had inappropriately touched them.

Leo Frank
One young woman, a 16 year old named Dewey Hall stated in court that Frank would talk to Mary Phagan “-two or three times a day.” These same women also testified to the fact that Frank was possessed of a decidedly lascivious nature and would regularly make sexual advances upon female factory workers, sometimes slipping away with them into a private room for suspiciously long stretches of time.
 Leo Frank, who was the head of Atlanta’s B’nai B’rith, a Jewish fraternal order, was eventually convicted of the murder and sentenced to hang. After a concerted and lavishly financed campaign by the American Jewish community, Frank’s death sentence was commuted to life in prison by an outgoing governor. But he was snatched from his prison cell and hung by a lynching party consisting, in large part, of leading citizens outraged by the commutation order — and none of the lynchers were ever prosecuted or even indicted for their crime. One result of Frank’s trial and death was the founding of the still-powerful Anti-Defamation League.
I'm going to include just a few of the 100 reasons Leo Frank was most probably guilty of this heinous crime....
On the 100th anniversary of the inexpressibly tragic death of this sweet and lovely girl, let us examine 100 reasons why the jury that tried him believed (and why we ought to believe, once we see the evidence) that Leo Max Frank strangled Mary Phagan to death — 100 reasons proving that Frank’s supporters have used multiple frauds and hoaxes and have tampered with the evidence on a massive scale — 100 reasons proving that the main idea that Frank’s modern defenders put forth, that Leo Frank was a victim of anti-Semitism, is the greatest hoax of all.
1. Only Leo Frank had the opportunity to be alone with Mary Phagan, and he admits he was alone with her in his office when she came to get her pay — and in fact he was completely alone with her on the second floor. Had Jim Conley been the killer, he would have had to attack her practically right at the entrance to the building where he sat almost all day, where people were constantly coming and going and where several witnesses noticed Conley, with no assurance of even a moment of privacy.
2. Leo Frank had told Newt Lee, the pencil factory’s night watchman, to come earlier than usual, at 4 PM, on the day of the murder. But Frank was extremely nervous when Lee arrived (the killing of Mary Phagan had occurred between three and four hours before and her body was still in the building) and insisted that Lee leave and come back in two hours.
3. When Lee then suggested he could sleep for a couple of hours on the premises — and there was a cot in the basement near the place where Lee would ultimately find the body — Frank refused to let him. Lee could also have slept in the packing room adjacent to Leo Frank’s office. But Frank insisted that Lee had to leave and “have a good time” instead. This violated the corporate rule that once the night watchman entered the building, he could not leave until he handed over the keys to the day watchman. Newt Lee, though strongly suspected at first, was manifestly innocent and had no reason to lie, and had had good relations with Frank and no motive to hurt him.
4. When Lee returned at six, Frank was even more nervous and agitated than two hours earlier, according to Lee. He was so nervous, he could not operate the time clock properly, something he had done hundreds of times before. (Leo Frank officially started to work at the National Pencil Company on Monday morning, August 10, 1908. Twenty-two days later, on September 1, 1908, he was elevated to the position of superintendent of the company, and served in this capacity until he was arrested on Tuesday morning, April 29, 1913.)
Newt Lee
 Newt Lee
5. When Leo Frank came out of the building around six, he met not only Lee but John Milton Gantt, a former employee who was a friend of Mary Phagan. Lee says that when Frank saw Gantt, he visibly “jumped back” and appeared very nervous when Gantt asked to go into the building to retrieve some shoes that he had left there. According to E.F. Holloway, J.M. Gantt had known Mary for a long time and was one of the only employees Mary Phagan spoke with at the factory. Gantt was the former paymaster of the firm. Frank had fired him three weeks earlier, allegedly because the payroll was short about $1. Was Gantt’s firing a case of the dragon getting rid of the prince to get the princess? Was Frank jealous of Gantt’s closeness with Mary Phagan? Unlike Frank, Gantt was tall with bright blue eyes and handsome features.
J.M. Gantt
J.M.Gant

    6. After Frank returned home in the evening after the murder, he called Newt Lee on the telephone and asked him if everything was “all right” at the factory, something he had never done before. A few hours later Lee would discover the mutilated body of Mary Phagan in the pencil factory basement.

    7. When police finally reached Frank after the body of Mary Phagan had been found, Frank emphatically denied knowing the murdered girl by name, even though he had seen her probably hundreds of times — he had to pass by her work station, where she had worked for a year, every time he inspected the workers’ area on the second floor and every time he went to the bathroom — and he had filled out her pay slip personally on approximately 52 occasions, marking it with her initials “M. P.” Witnesses also testified that Frank had spoken to Mary Phagan on multiple occasions, even getting a little too close for comfort at times, putting his hand on her shoulder and calling her “Mary.”
8. When police accompanied Frank to the factory on the morning after the murder, Frank was so nervous and shaking so badly he could not even perform simple tasks like unlocking a door.
9. Early in the investigation, Leo Frank told police that he knew that J.M. Gantt had been “intimate” with Mary Phagan, immediately making Gantt a suspect. Gantt was arrested and interrogated. But how could Frank have known such a thing about a girl he didn’t even know by name?
10. Also early in the investigation, while both Leo Frank and Newt Lee were being held and some suspicion was still directed at Lee, a bloody shirt was “discovered” in a barrel at Lee’s home. Investigators became suspicious when it was proved that the blood marks on the shirt had been made by wiping it, unworn, in the liquid. The shirt had no trace of body odor and the blood had fully soaked even the armpit area, even though only a small quantity of blood was found at the crime scene. This was the first sign that money was being used to procure illegal acts and interfere in the case in such a way as to direct suspicion away from Leo M. Frank. This became a virtual certainty when Lee was definitely cleared.

A few members of Mary Phagan's family; originally published in the Atlanta Georgian

A few members of Mary Phagan’s family; originally published in the Atlanta Georgian



You can, of course, read the other 90 reasons why it is Leo Frank was guilty of this crime for yourself. Mr Frank had the motivation and the means to commit this crime. He had inappropriately touched/harassed or molested other workers on previous occasions. Employing his authority to get his way. He was well connected, affluent and undoubtedly believed his money and connections would allow for such vileness 


Here's where we come around to the creation of the ADL. To protect a child killer and rapist? They sure didn't care much for the dead child!  That said Frank was, I suspect,  only the name attached to a concept . That concept/idea/ meme was truly what the ADL was protecting. An identity politics hot button/perception managing idea

What third party concept was the ADL created to protect ?

The ADL relentlessly promotes the ever present, hovering spectre of anti semitism as a means of defaming anyone and everyone. Who ever, what ever group or individual is chosen as a target.

They are the epitome of that which they claim to be against. The ADL is the pinnacle of defamation. The media willingly aids this organization in a  their non-stop pursuit of defamation/slander and libel against any individual or group of individuals chosen for targeting

 Charlottseville made this so very obvious to me.

 The ADL carried out a campaign of defamation against all white christian persons- Callin' it as I see it!  And by no means was I alone in noticing. Last week the article below was written & posted  by Gilad Atzmon at his  blog- it's worth linking to with a partial quotation

American Society isn’t a Zoo and White People Aren’t Monkeys

By Gilad Atzmon  
How to make well-meaning Americans into antisemites?
Make sure they read Peter Beinart’s Forward article,  The One Thing Jews Should Be Doing To Combat White Supremacy.
Beinart, a light Zionist ‘intellectual’  has kindly revealed how American Jews reacted when they heard the “neo-Nazis” chant, “Jews will not replace us.”  Some were fearful,  but, Beinart asserts, many others were somehow amused by it. “Replace you? Where, behind the counter at Wendy’s? We’re successful, industrious, upper-middle class. You’re the dregs of society. Replace you? Don’t kid yourselves. When it comes to America’s class hierarchy, we replaced you and your kind long ago.”

The dregs of society? 

One might advise Beinart that looking down on Goyim and calling them ‘neo Nazis’ and ‘supremacists’ while simultaneously engaging in his own tribal self-love, supremacist exercise is a very dangerous game.
Beinart claims that ‘white nationalists’ are largely a dysfunctional group of economy victims. “Studies show that in purely economic terms, white supremacists don’t differ much from the population as a whole. But they do differ from Jews, who are America’s wealthiest religious group.”

Defaming white christians is what the ADL is up too. Not justice. No sireee. Just more of that divisive identity politics.
It's right in your face! If you can't see it, then you're willfully blind.