Russian MPs suggest prison sentences for selling unmarked GMO products

© Reuters / Jim Young

    

A number of Russian MPs have suggested altering the current legislation and introducing criminal responsibility for illegal trade in GMO products. The idea is to mete out prison terms of up to two years for repeated offenders.

The bill tightening the rules for selling genetically modified products has been prepared by lawmakers representing the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, known for its nationalist stance. The draft has already been forwarded to the government and Supreme Court for assessment, and it will then be submitted to parliament.

If passed the bill would amend the existing article of the criminal code that orders punishment for concealing any information about potential hazards for human life and health. It would include violation of the rules for marking goods containing GMO material. Those found guilty would face fines of up to 300,000 rubles (about $6000), or up to two years in prison or penal labor. The bill specifies that, depending on the crime's circumstances, the punishment could be applied to the head of the company and the workers involved in the violations.

Currently, improper labeling of GMO products is punished by fines ranging between 20,000 and 50,000 rubles ($400 - $1,000) for individual entrepreneurs and between 100,000 and 500,000 rubles ($2,000 - $10,000) for companies. The law regulating the turnover of GMO was first introduced in Russia in 2007. It requires clearly visible indication on all goods containing 0.9 percent of genetically modified organisms by weight.

One of the sponsors of the new bill, MP Kirill Cherkasov, said in comments to the daily that the document was necessary until experts release full scientific research on the effects of GMO on human health. He added the current practice could lead to abuse, as sometimes the profits from selling unmarked GMO products can potentially cover even heavy fines.

Experts who took part in developing the bill also said that producers often sent "clean" products for government evaluation, but sold cheaper products with GMO content on the mass market.

According to the government statistics overview released in 2014, the share of GMO in the Russian food industry has declined from 12 percent to just 0.01 percent over the past 10 years, and currently there are just 57 registered food products containing GMO.

In February 2014, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev held a government session dedicated to the problem. He said Russia will create its own research base for genetically modified organisms that would provide the authorities with expert information and allow for further legislative measures and executive decisions.

Medvedev also warned against perceiving GMO products as "absolute evil," but said the government didn't support their use in the food industry.

Read More

Another proxy army: U.S. and Turkey begin program to train 15,000 anti-Syrian rebels

    

Turkey and the United States have started a program for training and equipping Syrian rebels in Kirsehir province of central Turkey, local daily HaberTurk reported on Tuesday.

"We have started the train-equip program with a small number (of Syrians). The reason of delay was logistics, it was about personnel and equipment transferred from the U.S.. Our soldiers and the U.S. soldiers are providing the training," the report quoted Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu as saying.

The program has been delayed several times since Turkey and the U.S. signed the agreement in February.

The program aims to train a total of 15,000 Syrian opposition fighters during a three-year period, 5,000 of whom will be trained at Hirfanli military base in Kirsehir.

The trained rebels should enter Syria through a secured area, the minister said, stressing that they could not cross through regions that are controlled by Islamic State (IS) militants.

Turkish and the American soldiers, as well as intelligence services, are discussing a secure place, the minister said. Cavusoglu also reiterated the need for a no-fly zone protection for trained Syrian opposition fighters from air strikes by the Syrian authorities.

"Will it be a notification or something else, we are technically working on this," he stated.

The Turkish government has long been backing military movement to topple Assad's Syrian government, while Damascus slams Ankara for supporting terrorism in the war-torn country.

Read More

U.S. and UK governments hide behind national security excuse to cover up war crimes

© Washington Post/Getty Images

    

Colonel Ian Henderson was a British official dubbed "the Butcher of Bahrain" because of atrocities he repeatedly committed during the 30 years he served as chief security official of that Middle Eastern country. His reign of terror began in 1966 when Bahrain was a British "protectorate" and continued when the post-"independence" Bahraini King retained him in the same position. In 1996, described him as "the most feared of all secret policemen" in Bahrain, and cited "consistent and compelling evidence that severe beatings and even sexual assaults have been carried out against prisoners under Henderson's responsibility for well over a decade."

A 2002 article reported that "during this time his men allegedly detained and tortured thousands of anti-government activists"; his official acts "included the ransacking of villages, sadistic sexual abuse and using power drills to maim prisoners"; and "on many occasions they are said to have detained children without informing their parents, only to return them months later in body bags." Needless to say, Col. Henderson was never punished in any way: "although Scotland Yard launched an inquiry into the allegations in 2000, the investigation was dropped the following year." He was showered with high honors from the U.K.-supported tyrants who ran Bahrain.

Prior to the massacres and rapes over which he presided in Bahrain, Henderson played a leading role in brutally suppressing the Mau Mau insurgency in another British colony, Kenya. In the wake of his Kenya atrocities, he twice won the George Medal, "the 2nd highest, to the George Cross, gallantry medal that a civilian can win." His brutality against Kenyan insurgents fighting for independence is what led the U.K. government to put him in charge of internal security in Bahrain.

For years, human rights groups have fought to obtain old documents, particularly a 37-year-old diplomatic cable, relating to British responsibility for Henderson's brutality in Bahrain. Ordinarily, documents more than 30 years old are disclosable, but the British government has fought every step of the way to conceal this cable.

But now, a governmental tribunal ruled largely in favor of the government and held that most of the diplomatic cable shall remain suppressed. The tribunal's ruling was at least partially based on "secret evidence for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) from a senior diplomat, Edward Oakden, who argued that Britain's defence interests in Bahrain were of paramount importance"; specifically, "Mr Oakden implied that the release of such information could jeopardise Britain's new military base in the country."

The U.K. government loves to demonize others for supporting tyrants even as it snuggles up to virtually every despot in that region. Her Majesty's Government has a particularly close relationship with Bahrain, where it is constructing a new naval base. The Kingdom is already home to the United States' Fifth Fleet.

The tribunal's rationale is that "full disclosure of the document would have 'an adverse effect on relations' with Bahrain, where the U.K. is keen to build further economic and defence ties." In other words, disclosing these facts would make the British and/or the Bahrainis look bad, cause them embarrassment, and could make their close friendship more difficult to sustain. Therefore, the British and Bahraini populations must be denied access to the evidence of what their governments did.

This is the core mindset now prevalent in both the U.S. and U.K. for hiding their crimes from their own populations and then rest of the world: disclosure of what we did will embarrass and shame us, cause anger toward us, and thus harm our "national security." As these governments endlessly highlight the bad acts of those who are adverse to them, they vigorously hide their own, thus propagandizing their publics into believing that only They — the Other Tribe Over There — commit such acts.

This is exactly the same mentality driving the Obama administration's years-long effort to suppress photographs showing torture of detainees by the U.S. In 2009, Obama said he would comply with a court ruling that ordered those torture photos disclosed, but weeks after his announcement, reversed himself. Adopting the argument made by a group run by Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney against disclosure of the photos, Obama insisted that to release the photos "would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in danger." Obama went further and announced his support for a bill sponsored by Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman to amend the Freedom of Information Act — a legislative accomplishment which Rep. Louise Slaughter told me at the time had long been "sacred" to Democrats — for no reason other than to exempt those torture photos from disclosure.

In March of this year, a U.S. judge who had long sided with the Obama DOJ in this matter reversed course. In a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, the judge ordered the release of thousands of photos showing detainee abuse in Afghanistan and Iraq, including at Abu Ghraib. He ruled that the Obama DOJ could no longer show any national security harm that would justify ongoing suppression.

Rather than accepting the ruling and releasing the photos after hiding them for more than a decade, the U.S. Justice Department last week filed an emergency request for a stay of that ruling with the appeals court. The argument from The Most Transparent Administration Ever™:

    

No healthy democracy can possibly function where this warped mindset prevails: we are entitled to hide anything we do that makes us look bad because making us look bad harms "national security," and we are the ones who make that decision without challenge. As the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer said:

To allow the government to suppress any image that might provoke someone, somewhere, to violence would be to give the government sweeping power to suppress evidence of its own agents' misconduct. Giving the government that kind of censorial power would have implications far beyond this specific context.

But even more threatening than the menace to democracy is the propagandized public this mentality guarantees. A government that is able to hide its own atrocities on "national security" grounds will be one whose public endlessly focuses on the crimes of others while remaining blissfully unaware of one's own nation. That is an excellent description of much of the American and British public, and as good an explanation as any why much of their public discourse consists of little more than proclamations that despite the decades of brutality, aggression and militarism their own side has perpetrated.

Read More

Favor for a favor: Clinton Foundation found to have received donations from repressive nations at the same time Hilary's State Dept. approved arms deals

© Reuters / Jim Young

    

Nations openly chastised by the US for dismal human rights records donated billions to the Clinton Foundation, while gaining clearance for weapons deals approved by the Hillary Clinton-led US State Department, according to a new report.

As the Obama administration increased military weapons exports, Hillary Clinton's State Department approved transfer of more than $300 billion worth of arms manufactured by US defense contractors to 20 nations that were or have since become donors of the Clinton Foundation, a major philanthropic organization run by the Clinton family. According to a review of available records of foundation donors by the International Business Times, those countries included governments that have received frequent criticism by the State Department for repressive policies.

"Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar all donated to the Clinton Foundation and also gained State Department clearance to buy caches of American-made weapons even as the department singled them out for a range of alleged ills, from corruption to restrictions on civil liberties to violent crackdowns against political opponents," IBT wrote.

Algeria, Kuwait, Oman, and Qatar were nations that directly donated to the Clinton Foundation during Clinton's term as secretary of state, even as they were requesting weapons shipments. The donated money represents a loophole in US law regarding political contributions.

"Under federal law, foreign governments seeking State Department clearance to buy American-made arms are barred from making campaign contributions -- a prohibition aimed at preventing foreign interests from using cash to influence national security policy," IBT noted. "But nothing prevents them from contributing to a philanthropic foundation controlled by policymakers."

The reviewed sales -- both commercial and Pentagon-brokered -- represent those made during "three full fiscal years of Clinton's term as secretary of state (from October 2010 to September 2012)," IBT reported. The deals made with the nations in question during this time add up to far more than arms agreements made with the same countries during the last three full fiscal years of George W. Bush's administration, according to the report.

"The word was out to these groups that one of the best ways to gain access and influence with the Clintons was to give to this foundation," Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center, told IBT. "This shows why having public officials, or even spouses of public officials, connected with these nonprofits is problematic."

The Clinton Foundation's donor list has come under closer examination since Hillary Clinton announced she is seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2016. In April, the Clintons acknowledged they have made "mistakes" regarding transparency amid increased public scrutiny concerning donations from foreign entities, especially when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, from 2009 to 2013.

Earlier this month, former President Bill Clinton defended his family foundation's donors.

"I don't think there's anything sinister in trying to get wealthy people in countries that are seriously involved in development to spend their money wisely in a way that helps poor people and lifts them up," Mr. Clinton told NBC News.

The Clinton Foundation signed a foreign donor disclosure agreement just before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, yet neither the department nor the White House raised issues with potential conflicts of interest regarding the weapons agreements.

IBT reported that in 1995 President Clinton signed a presidential policy directive demanding the State Department take into account human rights abuses when considering the approval of military equipment or arms purchases from US companies. Yet Mrs Clinton's State Department ignored this stipulation, helping the Obama administration increase weapons transfers.

The State Department, under the aegis of Clinton, hammered the Algerian government in its 2010 Human Rights Report for "restrictions on freedom of assembly and association," allowing "arbitrary killing," "widespread corruption," and a "lack of judicial independence."

"That year, the Algerian government donated $500,000 to the Clinton Foundation and its lobbyists metwith the State Department officials who oversee enforcement of human rights policies. Clinton's State Department the next year approved a one-year 70 percent increase in military export authorizations to the country," IBT reported. "The increase included authorizations of almost 50,000 items classified as 'toxicological agents, including chemical agents, biological agents and associated equipment' after the State Department did not authorize the export of any of such items to Algeria in the prior year.

"During Clinton's tenure, the State Department authorized at least $2.4 billion of direct military hardware and services sales to Algeria -- nearly triple such authorizations over the last full fiscal years during the Bush administration. The Clinton Foundation did not disclose Algeria's donation until this year -- a violation of the ethics agreement it entered into with the Obama administration."

IBT also reported that major US weapons manufacturers and financial corporations such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Goldman Sachs paid Bill Clinton lucrative speaking fees "reaching $625,000" just as arms deals they had an interest in were in the works with Mrs Clinton's State Department.

Hillary Clinton had pledged during her Senate confirmation hearings in 2009 that "in many, if not most cases, it is likely that the Foundation or President Clinton will not pursue an opportunity that presents a conflict."

US weapons sales tripled in 2011 to a new yearly high of $66.3 billion, according to the , mostly driven by sales to Persian Gulf nations allied against Iran. This dollar total made up nearly 78 percent of all worldwide arms deals that year, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Reuters reported in January 2013 that the State Department office that has oversight of direct commercial arms sales "was on track to receive more than 85,000 license requests in 2012, a new record."

The boom in arms sales by the Obama administration has continued to the present day, as Arab allies like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates are using American-made fighter jets against Islamic State and for proxy wars in places like Yemen and Syria.

According to the , foreign weapons sales now represent 25 percent to 30 percent of revenue taken in by Lockheed Martin, one of the top US-based arms dealers.

Read More

Weather chaos: Kashmir receives snowfall when other parts of India reel under severe heat

Snowfall in Kashmir

    

While the rest of India continued to simmer under intense heat wave, higher reaches of Rajouri district in Jammu and Kashmir received fresh snowfall. It has been snowing in Rajouri intermittently since Sunday (May 24) causing the mercury to drop considerably.

People have once again pulled out their woolens. Though snowfall in Rajouri is unusual for this time of the year, no one seems to be complaining. Instead people from nearby areas of Shopian and Poonch are thronging the place to enjoy the weather.

The sudden change in weather has reportedly been caused by a prevailing western disturbance over the region. As a result of which, the lower reaches of Rajouri received snowfall. Heat wave in the rest of India has so far claimed many lives.

[embedded content]

Read More

Ukraine Army commander claims to be under pressure to use heavy caliber artillery in Donbass

© AP Photo/ Efrem Lukatsky

    

According to the Ukrainian Armed Forces commander for Dzerzhynsk, commanders were under increasing pressure from personnel to bring forward heavy caliber artillery systems because the Donetsk People's Republic was using such systems.

Ukrainian frontline personnel insist on bringing forward heavy-caliber artillery systems in Donbass, the Ukrainian Armed Forces commander for government-controlled Dzerzhynsk told representatives of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM).

"He added that Ukrainian Armed Forces commanders were under increasing pressure from frontline personnel to bring forward heavy caliber artillery systems because the Donetsk People's Republic was using such systems with impunity," according to a report to the SMM published on May 25.

According to the commander, Ukrainian servicemen claim that fighters of the self-proclaimed DPR are using such weaponry.

In April 2014, Kiev launched a military operation in Donbass when resident opposed the coup in Kiev. According to the latest UN data, more than 6,200 people have been killed in the conflict.

One of the most important provisions of the Minsk agreements, signed in February, was the implementation of a constitutional reform as well as adopting a permanent law on the legal status of separate regions of Donetsk and Lugansk regions.

The agreement points out that decentralization must be implemented in agreement with representatives of the regions. However, Kiev has neglected that request saying the government will not have dialogue with breakaway territories.

On May 6, a meeting of the contact group resulted in creating four working groups on different aspects of solving the crisis.

Read More

Ukraine army shelling in Donbass kills 3 civilians, including 11-year-old, news agency reports

© RIA Novosti/Irina Gerashchenko

    

Three civilians, including a child, have reportedly been killed in eastern Ukraine after a shell fired by the Ukrainian military hit a residential area.

Three people, including an 11-year old girl, her father and one more civilian have died in the town of Gorlovka, the Donetsk news agency reported, citing senior rebel commander Eduard Basurin. Four more people have been injured, including one serviceman, Basurin said.

According to recent estimates by the UN human rights office, over 6,000 people have been killed and over 15,000 wounded in eastern Ukraine during a year of fighting. However, the real numbers could be much higher. At least one civilian was killed in Donetsk a week ago, after an army shell hit an apartment building amid intense fire on rebel positions.

Last week, the Ukrainian parliament approved a regulation that removed the obligation to protect certain human rights in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. Kiev says "anti-terrorist operations" in the area override their obligations in this regard.

The shelling comes amid a fragile ceasefire between Kiev and the Donbass rebels agreed in Minsk in February. Despite the agreements reached by the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany, then called the "last chance" to bring peace to Ukraine, violence in the region has continued.

Read More