U.S. Strike on Syria

On Thursday night, Donald Trump directed a strike against a Syrian military airbase, which targeted fighter planes, ammunition bunkers, radars, and petroleum storage. The Syrian regime said that the attack killed 7 soldiers and wounded 3.

In a brief press conference, Trump assured the American public that the strike was in retaliation for the last chemical attack against innocent civilians in Khan Sheikhoun in north-western Syria, which caused as many as 80 casualties, including many children.

Despite the fact that the UN could not reliably determine the accountability of the Syrian regime over the chemical attack, the U.S. government and the mainstream media launched a campaign to accuse them.

Ignoring the resolution of the UN, the NATO and other allies expressed their support for the strike and said that it was proportional. On the other hand, the Russian government condemned the attack and said that the U.S. is helping terrorists on the ground. Furthermore, the Russian Army announced the cessation of its communications with the U.S. in Syria and reiterated its support for the Syrian regime.

48 hours after the strike, in a joint statement, Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, and several local militias said that the U.S. had crossed the line and that the next time they will respond with force. According to this coalition, there are many reasons to think that the U.S. wants to exert utter control over Syria due to its geolocation.

Despite their many lies, Russia and the U.S. have committed several war crimes in Syria. For years, the U.S. has bombed civilians and assisted rebel groups with ties to terrorist organizations, which have killed thousands of innocents. And Russia has supported the Syrian regime, which has also killed thousands of innocent civilians.

Everyone still remembers, when in 2003, at an assembly of the UN, the then U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, assured that the Iraqi government had WMD, which could soon cause carnage in the region and perhaps worldwide. As a result, the international community created a coalition to invade Iraq, which caused as many as 1 million of deaths. It was not until after some years that the international community found out that the CIA deliberately fabricated that story to intervene in Iraq.

By attacking Syria, Trump has gained as much popularity as Bush did during the Iraqi invasion. Since the strike, the mainstream media, including the most critical such as CNN, and The New York Times have praised Trump’s military action and elevated him as an excellent President.

It is deeply troubling that Trump has found out the key to gain popularity. Due to his incapacity to govern the country, it appears that he will launch more military interventions in countries such as North Korea and Iran.

It is important to remember that for years, Donald Trump suggested that Obama’s intervention in Syria was a political move to gain popularity. However, he is now adopting the same ploy. Fortunately for everyone, he could not delete his past tweets and here there is a sample of them:

Screenshot from 2017-04-08 13-55-13Screenshot from 2017-04-07 23-10-42

Despite the complexity of the Syrian conflict, this will only end when all parties negotiate a realistic resolution. Apparently, Trump is not willing to do so, but a strong antiwar movement may force him (like in the past with previous administrations) to step back in his bellicose decisions.

While the U.S. antiwar movement is organizing to become stronger, Trump is deploying warships, and troops in the Middle East and the Korean Peninsula. Over the next months, the world will observe whether the antiwar movement succeeds or Trump causes chaos everywhere.

 

Advertisements

Republicans and Democrats: The Hypocritical Team

Since its beginnings, Wikileaks has aroused both hatred and veneration among its followers and detractors as much as any other worldwide organization. However, what is most striking is that a large number of these people, including Donald Trump and the U.S. Democratic Party, have changed their opinions about Wikileaks several times over the last few years, revealing a high degree of hypocrisy.

In 2010, after Wikileaks published hundreds of thousands of classified documents and videos provided by Chelsea Manning, President Trump said:

“WikiLeaks is disgraceful, there should be like the death penalty or something.”

At the time of the above statement, Trump was often criticizing Wikileaks and its staffers. However, during the last Presidential campaign, Trump changed his mind, and started to praise Wikileaks’ work while encouraging the group to continue disclosing secrets related to John Podesta and Hillary Clinton. He also suggested that Wikileaks was the most reliable media organization in the world.

On Tuesday, Wikileaks disclosed the largest leak of classified CIA documents to date, exposing that the CIA had been hacking electronic devices for surveillance in mass, even abroad  (including the techniques used to break said electronic devices).

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said:

“While I don’t want to get into confirming or denying this particular thing, I think it is interesting that — how different subjects are approached. People immediately began rushing to question this, and expressed that there should be a lot more coverage going on.This alleged leak should concern every single American in terms of the impact it has on our national security.”

“It’s interesting how there’s sort of a double standard with when the leaks occur, how much outrage there is,” Spicer observed, referring to internal leaks which have plagued the Trump campaign in the media.

“The idea that we are having these ongoing disclosures of national security and classified information should be something that everybody is outraged over in this country,” he added.

About the specific WikiLeaks accusations, he said: “You know all of these occurred under the last administration. That is important. All of these alleged issues.”

“There’s a big difference between disclosing John Podesta’s Gmail accounts, about a back and forth and his undermining of Hillary Clinton, and his thoughts of her on a personal nature and the leaking of classified information.”

Spicer also suggested that the U.S. will prosecute all those who are behind the latest disclosures, including any Wikileaks staffers. He added that Trump’s concerns likely stem from the threats that the information could pose to national security.

Spicer’s statements revealed that President Trump has changed his opinion about Wikileaks again, demonstrating that the President only considers his personal interest. When Wikileaks was revealing secrets favorable to his campaign, it was the best journalistic organization ever, but when it does the same to governmental institutions during his term, the group suddenly turns into a criminal organization.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Democratic Party and its supporters have gone through the same mental gymnastics. During Manning’s disclosures, most liberals and Democrats officials supported Wikileaks amidst Manning’s leaks, because they saw the organization as one exposing the truth of government corruption. However, during the last presidential campaign, most of the Democrats decided to change their opinion about Wikileaks and its founder, alleging that they were colluding with Russia to help Trump win the election.

As if that were not enough, after the last Wikileaks disclosure, a large number of Democrats (including those who suggested that Wikileaks was colluding with Russia) have changed their minds again and now think that Wikileaks is a reliable and honorable organization.

These extreme changes expose how a large number of people easily change their minds in relation to their own interests. Most of them lack critical thinking and are susceptible to being manipulated by both political parties and the media, though the end is the same: none of them are able to stand by either their convictions or their words.

The truth is that Wikileaks has published several countries’ governmental secrets for a decade. During all this time, it has never changed its editorial staff (most of the editors have been working at the organization for years), and it operates in the same exact way.

Wikileaks has allowed people from all over the world to know about governmental corruption, and that the CIA has conducted surveillance programs to spy on everyone all the worldwide. Thanks to that, people now have the opportunity to act in order to protect their privacy against these governmental threats. 

Wikileaks is not the real problem in our society; governments and politicians who manipulate their citizens on a regular basis are. In addition, the American political system is completely obsolete and should change to make it harder for politicians to adopt megalomaniac behaviors. The system should allow organizations such as Wikileaks to freely operate because it just exposes the truth about governmental corruption. Those who are not corrupt do not have to fear anything from Wikileaks.

The lack of critical thinking in a global society is troubling since it makes it harder for people to know what is real or not. Instead, it pushes them to blindly believe what their governments say to them. For that reason, we can observe sudden changes in people’s minds in short periods of time. In order to prevent this, the education system should change by teaching students how to think critically.

When people try to change the education system to develop critical thinking skills, both Republicans and Democrats will strongly oppose it to continue manipulating their citizens, which guarantees the continued  misconduct and political corruption in all layers of government.

Trump: The U.S. Transition From Democracy to Authoritarianism

In Upper New York Bay there stands the colossal Statue of Liberty, a universal symbol of freedom. She is also the Mother of Immigrants, embodying hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life in America. She stirs the desire for liberty in people all over the world. She represents the United States itself. However… In the last few weeks, the flame of freedom from her torch has started to flicker.ocaso sol estatua libertad simbolismo.jpgIn just two weeks, President Trump’s unlawful decisions and his unprecedented pressures on judges to rule in his favour have shaken the fundamentals of U.S. Democracy. For many, this indicates that Trump has hidden plans to turn the U.S. authoritarian to gain power. However, it won’t be possible without dominating the Supreme Court.supreme-courtThe U.S. Supreme Court is the final court of appeal and final expositor of the Constitution of the United States. It marks the boundaries of authority between state and nation, state and state, and government and citizen. It has the jurisdiction to determine whether Trump’s decisions are unlawful or not.

how-scalias-death-could-affect-major-supreme-court-cases-in-the-2016-term-1455500687480-facebookJumbo.png

The Supreme Court is composed of nine membersfour of which are currently Republican, and the other four liberal. The recent nomination of Neil Gorsuch (a Republican) to sit on the Supreme Court has set off all alarms. His presidency would tilt the balance for Republicans, and it could help Trump to accumulate an absolute power.

President Trump’s crusade to dominate courts and judges from all over the U.S. started when Judge James Robart, of the Federal District Court in Seattle, issued a temporary restraining Trump’s executive order to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. In response, Trump increased his pressures on Judges until days before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a temporary suspension.Trump said:

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-21-35

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-21-58

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-20-52

pantallazo-2017-02-11-11-02-44

Another indication of the U.S. transition into an authoritarian state is so-called alternative facts. Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer suggested that the U.S. government could “sometimes disagree” with real facts presented by the Media.

“Sometimes we can disagree with the facts,” Sean Spicer said.

“Trump’s team is offering  alternative facts to media reports,”  Kellyanne Conway said.

Trump started his attacks against the mainstream media during the last presidential campaign. Back then, several outlets plotted with Clinton and his aides to help her to win the election. Trump is now using it to fabricate stories to convince citizens that the only honest information comes from government sources.

As if this was not enough, on February 1, Republicans voted successfully to change the Congress rules to elect nominees without Democrats. It happened days later; Trump suggested them to “go nuclear” if Democrats tried to halt any of his decisions. Trump added:

“If we end up with that gridlock, I would say, if you can, Mitch, go nuclear,””Because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was put up to that neglect,” he said of Gorsuch, a federal circuit court judge. “So I would say, it’s up to Mitch, but I would say go for it.”

As we can see, there are many indicators that Trump’s government has initiated the U.S. transition from democracy to authoritarianism. However, to dissipate doubts, one must compare Trump’s decisions with dictators from other countries. All authoritarian states share in common an underlying structure based in the re-centralization of power. The following list describes some basic structure of a dictatorship:

1.Little or no freedom of speech
2.No freedom to hold meetings without the approval of the government.
3.No freedom of movement-individuals needs documents/internal passports to move around inside the country.
4.No freedom to travel abroad.
5.No independent justice system.
6.Promote alternative facts and censor the Mainstream media.
7.Any opposition to the regime is punished.
8.Change rules of government’s institutions.

It is evident then that President Trump has already implemented several basic structures from the list to do a U-turn into an authoritarian state. He has started his crusade against the media, changed the rules of the Congress, attempted to end with the neutrality of the judicial system and violated the U.S. Constitution. However, while the flame of the freedom of the Statue of Liberty is still burning, there will be hope and citizens, union workers and organisations will have the last word…

President Trump: Persecution of Refugees, Muslims, and Reactions.

Since President Trump and his entourage of advisors started their personal crusade against Muslims from SYRIA, IRAQ, IRAN, LIBYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN and YEMEN, there have been hundreds of peaceful refugees detained at airports from all across the U.S. (including green card holders)

Trump’s executive order suspending the entry of refugees into the U.S. constitutes a violation of international law and numerous human rights. According to the Geneva agreement:

“The core principle is non refoulement, which asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. This is now considered a rule of customary international law.”

As if that were not enough, Trump said in an interview:

“it has been “impossible, or at least very tough” for Syrian Christians to enter the United States.If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible and the reason that was so unfair — everybody was persecuted, in all fairness — but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

Such a statement implies a violation of the first amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom. However, President Trump said:

“This is not about religion – this is about terror and keeping our country safe.”

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-55-32

Since Trump signed the executive order, numerous elected republicans and democrats have also criticized Trump’s decision to persecute the Islamic community. So far, the elected republicans who have criticized the executive order are:

-Charlie Dent

-Jeff Flake

-Justin Amash

-Ben Sasse

-Susan Collins

-Barbara Comstock

-Rob Portman

-Orrin Hatch

-Dean Heller

-Brian Fitzpatrick

-Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

-Elise Stefanik

-Cory Gardner

-Will Hurd

-Leonard Lance

-Steve Stivers

-McCain

-Graham’s

McCain and Graham’s both released the following statement:

Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all that is decent and exceptional about our nation.

It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security.

Such a hasty process risks harmful results. We should not stop green-card holders from returning to the country they call home. We should not stop those who have served as interpreters for our military and diplomats from seeking refuge in the country they risked their lives to help. And we should not turn our backs on those refugees who have been shown through extensive vetting to pose no demonstrable threat to our nation, and who have suffered unspeakable horrors, most of them women and children.

Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. At this very moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improving our security.”

In response Trump tweeted:

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-55-56pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-56-07

The Democratic party has announced numerous protests and legal challenges over Trump’s executive order:

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and Democrats will introduce legislation to stop President Trump’s actions of temporarily banning refugees and arrivals from certain Muslim countries.

“This executive order was mean-spirited and un-American,”

“It must be reversed immediately,” said Schumer.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said House Democrats are exploring legal options.

Hillary Clinton, who is the main person responsible for the rise of Trump has also criticized Trump’s action. However, her resignation as presidential candidate during the last campaign would have facilitated another government.

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-51-54

The international community has also criticised Trump’s executive order to persecute Muslims. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said:

It’s not the time to build walls between nations.” “They have forgotten that the Berlin Wall collapsed many years ago,” “Even if there are walls between nations, they must be removed.”

In response, Rohani banned American citizens from entering Iran until President Trump steps back in his decision.

pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-23pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-39pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-50

The reception of refugees fleeing the war, fleeing oppression, is part of our duties,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said.

In an unstable and uncertain world, turning inward would be a dead end,” Hollande said he told Mr Trump in their first phone conversation since the president took office last week.

Trudeau, in a tweet, said Canada would welcome those fleeing “persecution, terror and war. Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith.”

Pantallazo-2017-01-30 16-58-29.png

Prime minister Theresa May, who is applying double standards with President Trump, decided to keep silent over the Muslim Ban by alleging that it is an American domestic issue. Her failure to condemn the persecution of refugees and Muslims has caused a wave of indignation in British society. In response, more than one million people have already signed a petition to demand that Theresa May cancels her invitation to Trump to visit the UK.

The leader of the major party of the opposition Jeremy Corbin said:

“President Trump’s executive order against refugees and Muslims should shock and appal us all. “Theresa May should have stood up for Britain and our values by condemning his actions. It should sadden our country that she chose not to. After Trump’s hideous actions and May’s weak failure to condemn them, it’s more important than ever for us to say to refugees seeking a place of safety, that they will always be welcome in Britain.”

So far the only ally who has supported the Muslim Ban has been Australia. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said:

I’m confident that the Australian government and the U.S. government will continue to support each other in ensuring that we can implement our strong immigration and border protection policies,” Ms Bishop said in Los Angeles.

The Australian government is working very closely with the administration and the US officials and we want to ensure that Australians continue to have access to the United States, as they have in the past, and people from the United States have access to Australia.”

Treasurer Scott Morrison also jumped to Mr Trump’s defence, reasoning that the newly-elected president was simply fulfilling an election promise.

In his first two weeks as president, Trump has:

1. Divided American society.

2.Violated international law.

3. Violated the first amendment of the U.S constitution.

4.Violated human rights of refugees and Muslims.

5. Made numerous enemies from all over the world.

6. Helped terrorist groups to recruit thousands of new members.

7. Endangered U.S. troops in the Middle East.

8. Endangered U.S. travellers.

Trump’s actions are already isolating the U.S. from the international community. Furthermore, the lack of critical thinking in society will make citizens from all over the world think that the vast majority of Americans approve Trump’s unethical policies. It will cause serious problems to millions of American travellers, who will be judged for something that they did not choose.

Fortunately, the protests against Trump’s executive order to persecute Islamic society shows that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. If Trump continues violating the law and American society continues holding mass protests, President Trump may then be impeached by the congress. If it ever happens, Pence who is politically smarter than Trump and is backed by most of Republicans elected would try to implement a catholic- evangelical system based on reforming the education system and denigrating women.

American society will have to be very attentive with the upcoming events. History shows that protests are useful, but unless something really shocking happens they will not have any real impact. In 2008, when the global financial crisis started, there were millions of citizens who held protests for years in countries such as Spain. However, the Spanish authoritarian government reacted by oppressing all the protesters without contemplations on a regular basis. Finally, this movement turned into a political organisation, which is strong, but was created too late. For that reason, if American society really wants to change the existing situation, aside from holding protests against the government, it should also create an alternative to replace the two major parties in the U.S.

The Republican and Democrat parties have been alternating the U.S. presidency for decades, which means that the corruption is already instilled in all layers of both organisations.

The upcoming turbulent times will determine whether global society can protect their human rights or not. Every single person from all over the world has the responsibility to resist any government attack against other human beings regardless of political and religious orientation.

Resisting against those who abolish human rights and violate the law on a regular basis is not bad, rather, it is everyone’s obligation for the sake of our children.

Be attentive, defend your neighbours, and never keep silent over injustices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfounded Accusations Against Wikileaks

In recent times, numerous “leftist” journalists and the U.S. Democratic Party have accused Wikileaks and the Russian government of colluding to help Trump. It is the first time that leftist organisations have virulently accused Wikileaks. For that reason, it is important to analyse what has happened.

Initially, Wikileaks formally announced that it owned thousands of John Podesta’s (Hillary Clinton presidential campaign) emails, including Clinton’s crimes. Wikileaks immediately announced the publication of all emails before the U.S. elections. As a result, Clinton accused Wikileaks of colluding against her. She also asserted that the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) had suggested that Russian hackers had hacked Podesta’s email with the intent of interfering in the U.S. presidential elections.

United States’ biased media took Clinton’s words as truth and began a campaign to undermine Wikileaks’ reputation. Unbelievably, there are not many journalists who have examined if the accusations are real or fabricated.

To better understand what has occurred, let’s analyse the facts.

1.Clinton’s accusations.

-Clinton fabricated conspiracy accusations against Wikileaks to hold her reputation. The FBI announced that Wikileaks did not have any connection with the Russian government. However, the FBI declared that the Russian government could hack U.S. computer systems. Nevertheless, it is not something new since both countries have done it many times to each other. In conclusion, Clinton’s accusations are unfounded.

2.Media accusations.

-Media has mostly been endorsed by Hillary Clinton and her team, which means that they are biased. For that to happen, John Podesta personally met several journalists to plan the coverture of the U.S. elections. It is disappointing for their public because journalists should fact check/verify information before any publication. It is clear that all media accusations have been unfounded.

3- Powerful people.

-Powerful people have helped Clinton to fabricate conspiracy theories to annihilate Wikileaks members.

Why I think that Wikileaks is an unbiased journalistic organisation:

Wikileaks has published millions of documents related to several governments across the world. For those, who have suggested that Wikileaks has only published documents related to the U.S. I will write more related to it later.

Here is the Timeline of all Wikileaks publications since its origins:

timeline-1

timeline-2

-Was Wikileaks partisan during the last U.S. elections?

Over the last year, several organisations and journalists have accused Wikileaks of being partisan after it released emails linked to Clinton’s “atrocities.” It is irrefutable that Wikileaks published more documents associated with Clinton than with Trump. Nevertheless, it does not mean that Wikileaks is a partisan organisation. Instead, Wikileaks is an honest journalistic platform, which possesses a 100% accuracy record in its publications since its creation.

“WikiLeaks publishes suppressed documents of diplomatic, ethical, historical or moral significance that reveal illegal or immoral behaviour. No government or private enterprise is immune. WikiLeaks is entirely funded by its readers – not by public funds, like the BBC, and not by private foundations, like the vast majority of non-governmental organisations. WikiLeaks is not “anti-western” or “anti-US It releases public interest material on governments and corporations – no matter who they are”.

-Why did Wikileaks publish emails linked to Clinton but not Trump ? Did Wikileaks unbiasedly publish the emails during the campaign? Why did Wikileaks not publish anything associated with Trumps’ “taxes?”

I am exhausted from listening to people affirming that Wikileaks is a dishonoured organisation, which deliberately published documents linked to Clinton to ruin her life. Strangely, some journalists recommended Wikileaks not to publish any document during the campaign as it might help Trump. Disregarding this advice, Wikileaks published all documents as it was considered to be in the public’s interest. Wikileaks had the duty to inform the public regarding misconduct behaviour from a presidential candidate before the elections in order to allow people to be well- informed. Honest journalism is about seeking truth regardless of the author.

-Why did Wikileaks not publish anything related to Trump’s “taxes”?

Unbelievably, numerous individuals suggested that Wikileaks expose documents associated with Trump’s misbehaviour. But how? Wikileaks did not have any documents related to him, but if Wikileaks possessed such documents, they would have been published.

WikiLeaks provides a safe means for whistleblowers to make disclosures to the public on wrongdoing committed by any government or private enterprise. For that reason, it is imperative to help whistleblowers.

In conclusion, journalistic platforms are obliged to remain loyal to the public and publish documents associated with any governmental crime.

All accusations against Wikileaks are partisan and malicious. Wikileaks has never collaborated with the Russian government. In fact, it has released over 650,000 critical documents relating to Russia under Vladimir Putin. In my opinion, people who think that Wikileaks is a partisan organization are partisan, and malicious or ignorant. 

 

Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump VS Democracy

The U.S. political polarization is shaking the stability of the country to levels never seen before since the U.S. Civil War (1861 to 1865). The political class is playing a dangerous game that may turn into a harsh conflict between Democrats and Republicans. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are not working to calm the environment; instead, they are fueling conspiracy theories that make people think that the system is rigged. As a result, Clinton supporters and Trump supporters are confronting each other, and some of them are organizing attacks to be perpetrated the day after the U.S. elections. It is degrading to see people from both sides using similar arguments to attack each other.

gfgzhfgx.jpeg

Analysts are warning people about the existing similarities between the current polarization of the country, and the polarization that there was during the U.S. Civil War (1861 to 1865), which left 620,000 to 750,000 dead. Of course, the context is not exactly the same.

The poor U.S. educational system has misled its students so that in many cases they do not know much about historical facts that started the bloodiest conflict in U.S. history. It may encourage some people to create militias to start a revolution because they may think that a long conflict is not difficult at all.

A large number of people do not trust in the U.S. system including policeman/men and people from all social classes. It does not help to stabilize the country, which means that the political class should reverse this tendency.

Both candidates don’t have very firm values because they’re both trying to win over everyone in the country to ensure their victory. It indicates that neither of them is ready to become the next U.S.president. An honest president is someone who tries to unite different communities to work together to improve their lives.

tNowadays, all U.S. communities are very divided against each other, and soon this confrontation may trigger the next civil war. The damage is already done, but it is still possible to avoid a harsh conflict. For that reason, both candidates should put their ambitions aside in order to unite the country again. However, they seem to be blinded by these ambitions, and they are not able to see the damage that they have already caused around the country.

Several experts have suggested that neither shouldn’t be running for the U.S. presidency, alleging that the next president should be honest, tolerant, and well prepared.

us-elections-2016-638871Hopefully, the day after the U.S. elections either Trump or Clinton will not use bellicose rhetoric against each other, but rather work to maintain the peace around the country. For that reason, the winner will have to manage the victory wisely, and not exclude the loser from important decisions.

The next president will have to be completely transparent and demonstrate that the elections are not rigged. It may be solved by allowing international observers to check the voting process across the entire country. If that is not possible, both candidates should negotiate and choose an independent company to check all electronic ballot boxes to verify that none of them was hacked.

It will also be crucial to ensure that the FBI, CIA, NSA and the U.S. judicial system remain unbiased.

indiceaayyNo one should use any police department to prosecute his or her opponents because if that ever happens it may trigger a dictatorship. The day after the elections people will pay attention to all the details surrounding the election process. The losers will be outraged for some time, but they will not use force unless something unfair happens.

The candidate, who loses the elections should react accordingly to the fairness of the elections. If the loser can verify that the elections are clean, then it is hard to imagine that people will reject the results. In such a scenario, all parties should ask their followers to accept it. People have already suffered a lot, and it is not acceptable to mislead them to fight for nonexistent issues.

Violence should be the last option, and everyone should defend their positions peacefully. The new president should allow his or her rivals to verify that the elections are fully clean and that there is no any political interference in any police department. Otherwise, people would have solid arguments to create militias and start a revolution against the government. It is understandable because no one wants to live in a dictatorship.

Advisors from both candidates should advise them to stop being intolerant towards one another.

Therefore, they may change their thoughts and bring harmony back to the country…..

Why Are U.S. Journalists Targeting Julian Assange?

For a month, a large number of journalists have accused Julian Assange of interfering in the U.S. presidential elections. They have suggested that Julian is collaborating with the Russian government in order to help Donald Trump become the next U.S. president. For that reason, “Wikileaks has fabricated thousands of fake emails to damage Hillary’s Clinton reputation”. However, some of these journalists had been venerating Julian’s work for years until they suspiciously changed their opinion of him.

Why have some U. journalists changed their opinions about Wikileaks?

According to Guccifer 2.0’s leaks, these journalists have been collaborating with Hillary Clinton for months in order to ensure her victory in the US elections. They repeatedly met with John Podesta (Campaign Chair to Hillary Clinton), to plan a strategy to manipulate U.S. citizens into voting for her. The latest Wikileaks revelations have corroborated this version. They have also fabricated stories against Julian in an attempt to hide their collaboration with Hillary Clinton.

According to the term journalism, they are not true journalists because they are working with the government to rig the elections.To dissipate doubts, here is the definition of journalism: Journalism is the discipline of collecting, verifying, analyzing and presenting information gathered regarding current events, including trends, issues, and people.Those who practice journalism are known as journalists.

Why is the U.S. government targeting Julian Assange?

President Obama holds animadversions against Julian because he has compromised his mandate by releasing U.S. secrets. These releases were related to a wide spectrum of crimes including mass surveillance, unfounded detentions, violations of privacy, war crimes, violation of human rights etc.

Why is the U.S. Democratic Party attacking Julian?

Hillary Clinton rigged the primaries to become the Democratic candidate to run for the U.S. presidential elections. She and her collaborators have committed multiple crimes in their careers as politicians.They are now targeting Wikileaks in order to hide these crimes from the public view since Wikileaks has presented clear evidence regarding these crimes.

The FBI is collaborating with Hillary Clinton.

Why?

The FBI has traditionally been controlled by the U.S. government. The director James Conney refused to prosecute Hillary Clinton, against all the opinions of the investigators, who suggested that she should be prosecuted.

Glenn Greenwald and Naomi Klein,

two great journalists, have criticized Julian Assange for the Podesta’s email disclosures. They made harsh comments about Julian during an interview, suggesting that it was not morally correct to publish the Podesta’s private emails because it may implicate innocent people who cannot defend themselves.

Wikileaks has been publishing secrets from important people, who have committed crimes or violated the law. They do not reveal secrets from honest people, so in such context, Wikileaks is doing a great job. Therefore, honest people should not worry about appearing on Wikileaks’ disclosures.

Glenn Greenwald suggested that Julian’s ideas are conditioned by the isolation that he is suffering in the Ecuadorian Embassy. “ This statement was pretty nasty”

Wikileaks has never compromised people’s lives for over a decade. No one has died as a consequence of any publication. Wikileaks staff are working under intense pressure “ 24/7” , they work pretty much on verifying all documents before they are published.

How transparent would this world be without Wikileaks?

Without Wikileaks, the transparency from governments would be poor, and no one would know when governments commit crimes. Thousands of people would be oppressed.

Everyone should protect Wikileaks against those who try to destroy it.

Before you criticize Wikileaks, stop to think for a few hours, about how the world would be without this journalistic platform.